Monday, October 1, 2007

Censoring public condemnation of torture??

Bono, of U2, debt relief, and poverty fighting fame, just recently received the National Constitution's Center Liberty Medal for 2007.

The video of the event, which obviously includes Bono's acceptance speech where he deplores torture and its acceptance by a significant fraction of Americans (38%) has been edited to have his condemnation excised.



The complete, unedited version of Bono's acceptance speech is now available at the Liberty Medal web site.

Okay, I've seen the explanation, but there was certainly something odd about the original availability of the video.


Bryan said...

Am I going to have to babysit you kids?

I don't know where "The Smirking Chimp" got the idea that he was watching the "official" version of the award ceremony.

To my bleary eyes, the site calls attention to a "highlight" version of the event while also referring to a transcript (refers to torture, AFAICT) and to a full version of the event at ABC.

"Watch Bono's the ceremony highlights, webcast on See the complete speech webcast on Also, read the transcript of Bono's speech."

And now you're helping turn it into a story about censorship?

Bryan said...

I located a cached version of the Liberty Medal site, dated Sept. 29.

It has two versions of the video available. One was the edited version (no doubt) and the other was the abc version.
Liberty Medal should have noted that one of the versions was an edited "best of" but the charge of censorship appears to have been bogus as soon as Mary Shaw suggested it. At the very least she should have double-checked as of the day she posted (Sept. 30).

Marc said...

At least I indicate it when I've updated a post :-)

As for censorship, is it "just editing" or "censorship"? There's gray, but omitting the condemnation of a policy endorsed by this administration from what gave every indication of being a sanctioned record of the event just..seems..well, to at least give the appearance of censorship--and it may very well have been nothing more than that.

Bryan said...

As far as I can tell, there was no indication at all that one record (the edited one) was any more official than the other as of Sept. 29 before Mary Shaw posted.

I'll be posting the screen capture later on since I find Mary Shaw's blunder both amusing and newsworthy. I'll drop by to provide a link to it so you can judge for yourself.

Bryan said...

The screen capture for Oct. 29:

I should have taken two screen captures so that I could include the date (which appeared at the top in Google cache tradition), but it's easy enough to see the differences between this version and the current one (as well as the descriptions of the site as of Oct. 1). So it's practically self-authenticating.

The preview suggested that the URL would not appear in full, so I hit return after ever forward slash until it would fit. Sorry about the inconvenience. Clicking on my name and doing a sensible search pattern should also get you to the image.

Bryan said...

That should have been Sept. 29 rather than Oct. 29.