Chicago ABC affiliate WLS was caught red-handed trying build a mountain out of a molehill in their story on the retirement of Representative Henry Hyde who presided over the House impeachment hearing of President Bill Clinton. The original story (preserved by the Google cache) was titled, “Clinton impeachment was retaliation for Nixon, says retiring congressman“
The only problem is that’s not exactly what he said.
Andy Shaw asked Hyde if the Clinton proceedings were payback for Nixon’s impeachment.
“I can’t say it wasn’t, but I also thought that the Republican party should stand for something, and if we walked away from this, no matter how difficult, we could be accused of shirking our duty, our responsibility,” said Hyde.Powerline deconstructs the editorializing of author Andy Shaw.
Raw Story The Raw Story contacted the station who acknowledge that the story was pulled and reedited due excessive commentary by the author.
The piece was removed from the ABC Chicago affiliate’s (WLS) website Friday because the network felt it had too much commentary by the author, a staffer says. The affiliate also took down a video which included comments from Hyde.
“It was much more commentary than was necessary,” a source inside ABC 7 Chicago told RAW STORY Friday morning.
Asked if the story was removed because the piece was editorialized, the staffer said “yes.”ABC scrambled to refocus the story and edit out Shaw’s errant commentary – it’s now Rep. Hyde reflects on 30 years of office.
Kevin,
Living in Chicago all my life and having a visceral hatred for what local TV news has come to in this town (meaning I never watch it anymore), I’ve gotta vouch for the integrity of ABC 7’s Andy Shaw.
If there are a handful of bonified ‘journalists’ in this city (think Carol Marin), count Shaw among them. He’s not some pretty boy ‘talking head’, but a serious Investigative Reporter who has built a solid rep over I think maybe two decades.
Meaning, he’s never displayed any outright partisanship or penchant for sweeps month hype and hysteria. Therefore, I count it as an oversight, rather than an intentional smear.
Is this an example of why reporters are so much purer than bloggers because their stuff goes through all those layers of editors and careful vetting, and, you know- people in charge actually reading their stuff and making sure it’s accurate before it ever actually reaches the public?
Clive Tolson: the piece was admittedly editorialized. And then yanked because they say it was (that was their explanation as to why the piece was yanked).
“Editorializing” is code for “it was an op/ed piece; and, what was presented as reportage of information — relied upon to be fact and the source to be factual — was, instead, opinion that cannot be substantiated outside of an emotional interpretation by the source and others of sympathetic perspective.”
Opinions are like a*******: everyone has one.
Just because Powerline says its ‘editorializing’ -S-, don’t make it so! And, DeputyHeadMistress is correct, it was a mistake that was caught and corrected!
It’s the kind of vetting your infallible leader Mr. Hindrocket at Powerline, has proven he’s in desperate need of!!
At the risk of sounding like a smarta**, I have to ask: if Clive Tolson never watches local Chicago tv news anymore, how can he (or she) vouch for Andy Shaw’s integrity (or anyone else’s, for that matter)?
The idea of Clive here “vouching” for someone makes me want that person ridden out of town on a rail after tar and feathering. It’s only the fact that Clive is endorsing someone he freely admits he never watches that spares Mr. Shaw from his most-likely-deserved fate.
“Hindrocket” is “our infallible leader?” Nice attempt to change the topic, Clive. Scroll down, and you’ll see the leader around these parts is named Kevin.
Oh, and Clive? J. Edgar says don’t wear that pink chiffon number again. It makes you look fat.
J.
Clive Tolson: THE STATION SAID that it was editorializing. Go read the information again.
However, let’s apply your reasoning here and by that reasoning, we can easily conclude that nothing the station “says” is “so”. That’d include the reporter. Fine by me.
Ha, the very idea that Hindrocket at PowerLine is my “fearless leader” is…is…very stupid thing to write, Clive. Makes you look even more stupid for having written it.
I remember reading this headline, then reading what Hyde actually said and thinking, “Oh, come on.” Besides which, I can’t imagine there are a pack of Republicans sitting on the Hill in a smoke-filled room saying to one another, “We’ve GOT to avenge Tricky Dick if it’s the LAST thing we do!” It’d be like Democrats ganging up to exact vengeance for Marion Barry’s ouster.