>>Now, Gillian (whom I am sure will eventually get this note) admitted the
>>editing, and I deplored it and told her so, precisely because it undermines
>>HER credibility! She could have informed the reader that the narrator was
>>repeating a question, but they went to some length to make it look like the
>>narrator was facing Dawkins. That in and of itself is a deception in my
>>book although others, including Gillian, say it is common practice in the
>>video world. I will go to my grave thinking that that practice is unwise.
I guess you must never have been involved in the production of a video or
seen how documentaries are made. There are always two cameras at least,
and the two are mixed in the video to give the impression that the camera
is switching positions, but in fact the segments have to be edited
together. Unless someone has deliberately done something to put words in
anothers mouth, the practice is absolutely necessary. You have never seen
a documentary in your life that was professionally made that did not have
exactly this kind of editing done deliberately and constantly. Of course,
in Hollywood, it is more extreme. One party may go through all their
speaking lines without the other person even being present, the the other
person does likewise and the two segments are edited together...but then
that is hollywood....
>>But to conclude. Christians are supposed to be moral. I don't think
>>doctoring tapes without alerting the viewer is moral. Do you?
You cannot call inserting a questioner asking a question that was not
captured on tape doctoring. If you do so, you exclude every professionally
produced documentary. There was no intent on the part of the producers to
deceive the audience that I (or you, apparently) could detect.
Art
http://biology.swau.edu