Bullsh*t is aptly named

[vakkotaur]

There's been a couple interesting posts on a_f_r, a group for those interested in renaissance faires. Last year there was a camera crew going around one fair and some interviews were done. A few days ago the result aired.

Before it aired this was posted:

Given the amount of stuff about faires in the media (including cartoons) which shows faire folk as either out of touch oddballs or downright crazy, this could be a chance for some more or less factual publicity about faires in general. On the other hand, the show has an interesting history and premise: It's basically a debunking effort, in which several sides of an issue are presented--and, thanks to careful editing (not to mention interviewing techniques) one side looks like total idiots, and the other looks like dupes, or, alternately, bunco artists. On the other hand, Penn & Teller have a history with faires. [source]

And after it aired:

As some of us feared, it was another lame "exposé" on those nutcases who like the faire scene. And, apparently I was one of the major figures quoted (completely out of context) establishing how big nutcases we are. [source]

A bit of editing and anything be can taken out of context and still be presented as true, and sadly find folks that will believe the result. And who better than magicians to misdirect?

Comments

[nefaria.livejournal.com]

Same deal with the furry documentaries, the producers get to choose between 1. a balanced, sympathetic portrayal of their subjects that leads to greater understanding, or 2. a scandal-wracked tabloid expose that breeds resentment and big ratings. Sometimes small local papers will make an honest effort at 1., but the big names ALWAYS choose 2.

[ken-redtail.livejournal.com]

Replace faires with furry and see what happens! :D

[vakkotaur.livejournal.com]

Pretty much the same thing, only worse, and maybe with another tired thread full of idiots on Fark.

Perhaps the CSI episode 'Fur and Loathing' wasn't a bad thing. With its obvious errors, that should be apparent to anyone and not just furs, it makes a great indicator. Anyone who claims they learned what furry is from it is likely either an idiot or a troll and thus not worth any reasonable person's time.

[jcw-da-dmg.livejournal.com]

And who better than magicians to misdirect?

Members of the Bush administration. I'm sorry, was that my outside voice?

[thecanuckguy.livejournal.com]

And yet when Weird Al implied in his song that all people who go to renfaires are "white and nerdy", I laughed. :)

This is media's job, to get facts wrong and to misrepresent stories. I'm reminded of a few incidents in our family - several years ago (must be about 25 now) my mom got in a car accident with my sister in the car, nothing serious and no one was hurt, but the car was wrecked and made a newsworthy photo. A photographer from the Winnipeg Sun (the "second" paper in the city, tabloid-style and, imho, less reputable) came by to take a picture and my mom requested that it not appear on the front page, with the photographer assuring her it wouldn't. Guess where it was the next day. (Yeah, I know, the photographer doesn't make that decision, but I highly doubt he passed it along.)

And when I was interviewed by the paper last November about my anthems hobby, the article as it ran was a bit different from the interview. I also noticed a few inaccuracies about anthems from the facts they did mention in the paper (since the average person's knowledge of anthems is quite low, they woudln't notice, but they glared out at me.) One of the inaccuracies (that they mentioned in a sidebar that had some interesting anthem facts, not quotes from me) directly contradicted a fact that I gave them about the anthem (that was put in the article as a quote from me.) Go fig. (And one part during the interview where she asked me how my wife regards my hobby, I joked back "she probably thinks of it as a sickness. No, actually, she finds it quite interesting and is quite supportive in my hobby. The article says: "'My wife would probably call it a sickness,' says Kendall, who gets around 10 e-mails daily from people either seeking or offering anthem-related information. 'But I find myself getting into it more and more because there aren't that many of us out there and I want to keep the hobby alive.'" Not exactly the sentiment I meant with the humourous off-handed comment, eh?

[vakkotaur.livejournal.com]

That sort of thing is exactly why many if not all furcons bar the press unless they have vetted them to make sure they aren't tabloid types even if they work for a non-tabloid. I also recall a local news story about a pesticide that had a good chance of getting banned and they showed a cropduster spraying. And made the cropdusters angry as that chemical was one they never used, for legal reasons - that is, it was illegal to apply that chemical by aircraft. But a clueless new editor can make something look worse than it is. Worse, one can intend to.

I've told more than a few people that they need to think of something know and know well, that isn't universal. Then think of the last time there was a TV show or news report about it. "Remember how wrong they got everything?" Often an affirmative is the reply. "Well, they get everything else just as wrong. They know how to make television, nothing more."

That was somewhat confirmed by David Gerrold (he wrote the Trouble with Tribbles episode of the original Star Trek, amongst other things) who related that pretty much only TV scriptwriters get to write TV scripts now. Seems reasonable, except that all they know is how to write a TV script. They don't know anything about police work, about detective work, about how the courts work, about science fiction, or westerns. But every time TV's prime genre change, they go write scripts about it, and thus TV keeps sucking. Those who DO know about those things aren't let in, with only the very occasional exception.

[melissasutton.livejournal.com]

(blink blink) just please God tell me they didn't film this at my faire

[vakkotaur.livejournal.com]

Well, I'm not God, but I can tell you that it was not at Siouxland. It was in one of the Carolinas. And there were the various forms or waivers that granted permission to use the interview material... but to use and to misuse are about equivalent in television.

[melissasutton.livejournal.com]

whew!

WTF?

[thecanuckguy.livejournal.com]

Wait a tick ... Glenn Miller? Anvil Chorus? As in the song often featured in cartoons? As in ... the one from La Traviata (may be mistaken on the opera, I have it on CD upstairs). What does the Glenn Miller one have in common with the opera?

[vakkotaur.livejournal.com]

I had to double check. I was sure I had the version you mention, but it wasn't under that name. It's Giuseppe Verdi's Troubadour Gypsy Chorus from Il Trovatore. The Miller version is roughly based on that, but the style is of course quite different. The Miller version doesn't have the obvious anvil-hammering, though you can easily hear the places where it would be.