Yes. i am not claiming hes a saint here or endorsing him.
the problem im seeing people have is with the fact that they were 'dishonest' and using a 'false story' during their sting.
if there is no actual principled stand against stings and undercover reporting then it reeks of bias and inconsistency.

i dont have a problem with people not liking him for dishonesty in reporting/editing.


yes they have a political motive and longstanding feud behind trying to expose wapo.
does that change whether its valid to test their standards?

You're REALLY naive if you think he was doing this to "test their journalistic integrity"

This was a smear campaign, and since you're familiar with his past you're being painfully, pathetically dishonest to not acknowledge that.

I explicitly acknowledged it was politically motivated.
Its a fact that it was testing their journalistic integrity.

getting triggered and trying to put what i said in a worse light like the bitch you are doesnt make what i said dishonest, wrong or naive.

funny when lefties cry about smear campaigns. whining about the terrain they set

Yeah no.

Calling it "testing their journalistic integrity" implies the analysis was going to be fair and unbiased.

If it was actually a test they would have gone public immediately that WaPo didn't publish the story, and so they acted with integrity.

That didn't happen, because this was a smear campaign and NOT a test of their integrity. Their motives weren't just "political", they were nefarious, evil, whatever adjective you want to use that points out O'Keefe's organization was not acting with moral integrity. Only calling them "political" isn't even a 5% truth, it's a pathetic attempt to equivocate.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Nov 28 2017 12:40am

logically untrue. their integrity can be tested by biased sources.



That didn't happen, because this was a smear campaign and NOT a test of their integrity.[/QUOTE]

trying to find actual flaws in their practices is not a smear.
Smear: damage the reputation of (someone) by false accusations

Nor would a smear campaign necessarily mean that something they did isnt testing their journalistic integrity.
think this through logically.

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Nov 28 2017 12:41am

i don't have a problem with the dishonesty nor the false story, both are foregone conclusions whenever this guy open's his mouth
i do have a problem with the political motive here targeting the women who accused roy moore because they had nothing to work with in trying to discredit the stories of the women themselves
for some reason you don't seem to have a problem with it and keep bringing up questions about the validity of testing journalistic integrity

This post was edited by duffman316 on Nov 28 2017 12:43am

And there you go again, assuming O'Keefe's motives were pure here, that they were going to "test their integrity" when in reality literally every other time O'Keefe has made the news with this kind of sting operation he's deliberately fabricated evidence and lied out his ass.

Then again, Libertarians can't do two-step problems, so I don't expect you to actually be able to put two and two together to make four.

Do you think truth and reporting standards are important? even if they are rape or sexual misconduct allegations or some other highly emotional/heinous topic?
or should all accusers be uncritically believed? and testing a news org is terrible?


This is literally the opposite of what i said. You are compromised by your desire to attack what I say.

When you say O'Keefe' was "testing journalistic integrity" you are implying that his motives are simply to test WaPo, and not to find anything he can to smear them with.

You're using pathetic double-speak so you can minimize the immoral side of what he's doing.


Again, two step problems.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Nov 28 2017 12:48am