Is Diane Reidy incident propaganda?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Josh Heuer

Active Member
If you can view videos, I would suggest watching this, it's only 7 or 8 minutes long.

The claim here is simple. The outburst Diane Reidy had that was on the news recently may not have actually happened as shown on the news.
This might just be a case of FOX news dubbing audio in (of Diane Reidy).
Basically, there's footage of Diane Reidy not on the floor, she's elsewhere near an elevator, and she goes on her rant. At one point you can hear the elevator ding.

If I understand this correctly, FOX originally aired the video of the outburst that had no audio. It basically just showed her go to the podium, say some things, and be escorted out. However, they later showed the same clip but with the audio from her rant near the elevator (you even hear the ding), making it look like her mad rant actually happened in that shot. One other clue mentioned is that as she's dragged away from the podium (and hence the microphones) you can still hear her at the same volume.

Again, is this just simply a case of FOX news editing video/audio for some purpose? Diane Reidy clearly said these things, but not when FOX news would like us to believe she did.

Any ideas?

Edit: I wouldn't take the end of the video too seriously, they make a point that Diane Reidy talked to some gentlemen just before she gets up and walks to the podium, and he happens to get on what appears to be a cell phone. Doesn't mean anything if you ask me.
 
Last edited:

JRBids

Senior Member.
I've seen where both Diane Reidy and her husband have made statements. Have one of them said the video is not true?
 

Bill

Senior Member.
If you can view videos, I would suggest watching this, it's only 7 or 8 minutes long.

The claim here is simple. The outburst Diane Reidy had that was on the news recently may not have actually happened as shown on the news.
This might just be a case of FOX news dubbing audio in (of Diane Reidy).
Basically, there's footage of Diane Reidy not on the floor, she's elsewhere near an elevator, and she goes on her rant. At one point you can hear the elevator ding.

If I understand this correctly, FOX originally aired the video of the outburst that had no audio. It basically just showed her go to the podium, say some things, and be escorted out. However, they later showed the same clip but with the audio from her rant near the elevator (you even hear the ding), making it look like her mad rant actually happened in that shot. One other clue mentioned is that as she's dragged away from the podium (and hence the microphones) you can still hear her at the same volume.

Again, is this just simply a case of FOX news editing video/audio for some purpose? Diane Reidy clearly said these things, but not when FOX news would like us to believe she did.

Any ideas?

Edit: I wouldn't take the end of the video too seriously, they make a point that Diane Reidy talked to some gentlemen just before she gets up and walks to the podium, and he happens to get on what appears to be a cell phone. Doesn't mean anything if you ask me.
The ending seems to be the part the person speaking is actually concerned about. Appears they are trying to make more out of it than actually happened. They focused on the one guy and ignored the others standing around Reidy. Some people looked up at the outburst others didn't. The floor as a whole was rather chaotic at the time. As far as FOX is concerned if she kept yelling the same accusations over and over they may have made the editorial choice to overdub the event but failed to explain what they were doing. Was it a staged protest rather than a spontaneous outburst? Impossible to know. The HR has some rather strange people in it at the moment.
 

Josh Heuer

Active Member
Looks like they only had audio of the elevator rant at that time, so just played it over a repeat of the C-SPAN video. Probably she was saying more or less the same thing there.

Here's a longer account of the the background to the incident. Basically she was under a lot of stress, and thought God told her to do it.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/10/17/why-house-stenographer-dianne-reidy-snapped.html
That sounds reasonable, but can we confirm without a doubt what she said at the podium was the same or similar to what was recorded elsewhere and used as the audio? It seems like an attempt to demonize the woman by using audio of her ranting when she may not have actually done that.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
That sounds reasonable, but can we confirm without a doubt what she said at the podium was the same or similar to what was recorded elsewhere and used as the audio? It seems like an attempt to demonize the woman by using audio of her ranting when she may not have actually done that.

According to CNN, she said, in part,:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/10/17/stenographer-snaps-rants-on-house-floor/?hpt=hp_t2
Also:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/10/17/stenographer-dragged-off-house-floor-after-protest/
Sounds similar to me.
 
Last edited:

Bill

Senior Member.
I don't think anything here rises to the level of propaganda. What issue or point of view would they be pushing? Diane Reidy needs therapy? I don't know of any of the major news outlets that are running with Reidy's allegations.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
And Fox were floating the idea of an anti-christian agenda by using her case, so how would that fit into the propaganda narrative if they were also 'censoring' it?
 

Josh Heuer

Active Member
And Fox were floating the idea of an anti-christian agenda by using her case, so how would that fit into the propaganda narrative if they were also 'censoring' it?
That's sort of what I was getting at, I've seen an article claiming it was a smear on Christians. The propaganda part comes into play because FOX news DELIBERATELY dubbed audio to get an effect. If you watch the original video where you can't hear what she's saying, it's just a crazy lady at the podium being escorted off. Nobody cares about that. But when you add talk of God, The Lord, Jesus, it's now a crazy Christian lady. Now there's a whole different angle to the story.
 

Josh Heuer

Active Member
Do you really think she was making a cogent argument at the podium and waited until she got the elevator to start ranting?
I don't, and that's not the point. It's the whole fact that they dubbed over audio and that's called FAKING the news. It happened, but now how Fox News wants you to think it did.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I don't, and that's not the point. It's the whole fact that they dubbed over audio and that's called FAKING the news. It happened, but now how Fox News wants you to think it did.

And yet their overlaid audio does not seem like it would be significantly different to what she actually said. It's a non-issue. Makes no difference.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
But she was specifically christian and that was her rationale. So she was a crazy christian lady. It doesn't seem misguiding.
 

Josh Heuer

Active Member
But she was specifically christian and that was her rationale. So she was a crazy christian lady. It doesn't seem misguiding.
Actually, she doesn't appear to be a crazy Christian lady. This seems to have been an isolated incident. She reportedly hasn't slept well for a short while before the incident, waking up multiple times in the night from the Holy whatever. After she got this rant off her chest she said she feels fine. Sounds a bit out there but definitely not typical of crazy Christians who spout these rants regularly.
And yet their overlaid audio does not seem like it would be significantly different to what she actually said. It's a non-issue. Makes no difference.
It does make a difference...the News can dub audio over whatever they want, under the guise that it's 'similar' ? That's not honest reporting. It IS an issue.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Actually, she doesn't appear to be a crazy Christian lady. This seems to have been an isolated incident. She reportedly hasn't slept well for a short while before the incident, waking up multiple times in the night from the Holy whatever. After she got this rant off her chest she said she feels fine. Sounds a bit out there but definitely not typical of crazy Christians who spout these rants regularly.

It does make a difference...the News can dub audio over whatever they want, under the guise that it's 'similar' ? That's not honest reporting. It IS an issue.

I think in this particular case it makes no difference. There was a lot of reporting on the issue. My perception of the incident would have been no different had they not done that.
 

Bill

Senior Member.
It does make a difference...the News can dub audio over whatever they want, under the guise that it's 'similar' ? That's not honest reporting. It IS an issue.

It's only a real issue if they substantially changed the content of what she said at the podium. From everything I've read that is not the case. A worst they are guilty of making a poor editorial choice. That's a far cry from faking the news. Reporters routinely paraphrase the people they quote without changing the meaning and are not accused of faking news. They may not have engaged in best practices but I can't see where they have committed a major ethical transgression.
 

Josh Heuer

Active Member
So I'm left asking myself...why wouldn't the news station leave the original audio?
What's the point of dubbing audio in? They did it for a reason.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Because the visuals by the microphone are dramatic, so they splice the speech content over that - it makes sense in the 'package' they present from their perspective, ie, sensationalism.
Maybe the speech by the elevator was 'juicier' than what she said at the podium.
Do you think the microphone speech was significantly different to the recorded one? Did she drop some crucial information they want to cover up?
How do you think this story is being spun in contrast to what really happened?
Do you think Fox engineered the christian part of it, in order to claim christian persecution? Or are Fox actively persecuting (smearing) christians?

Regardless, well spotted and worth bringing to attention, but it doesn't change the content of the story.
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
Agree with Mick, the video at the elevator is not as compelling, and the chamber had TV cameras positioned and there is a clear image. Instead of people with cell phone cameras at the elevator.
 

Josh Heuer

Active Member
I just think it's wrong to not report it as it happened...even if she said basically the same thing in both situations. They really spliced those audio and video segments together for added effect. Seems disingenuous to me.

Kind of like if instead of quoting people on here, I just started paraphrasing what they said and putting it in quotation marks. Why not just use the original quote?
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
They have a half hour newscast and fit everything in there. So they're not going to just televise the whole thing just so the conspiracy theorists can see it. Don't you understand editing for conciseness?
 

Josh Heuer

Active Member
They have a half hour newscast and fit everything in there. So they're not going to just televise the whole thing just so the conspiracy theorists can see it. Don't you understand editing for conciseness?
They didn't need to put 'the whole thing' on, they put the relevant clip of her being taken away from the podium. That's all they needed. The problem was dubbing audio in that didn't need to be there. It has absolutely nothing to do with the length of the clip they showed. Read the OP and if possible watch at least the first half of the video I linked to, it should sum things up.
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
As has been pointed out, perhaps the audio was not good when she was at the podium, but the video was better.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I don't think there's anything more to add here. We all know know what happened, and have expressed an an opinion on it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top