Background: Think Progress is a blog of the Center for American Progress, a liberal DC think tank.
Watch the encounter below, where Watters gives the Think Progress novice a crash course on Gotcha Journalism. Hilarity guaranteed.
Via RedState.com.
- Comment (34)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Nov '10
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
Watters totally avoided his questions. I want to hear about the Fox insider....
Jun '10
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
Actually, I saw that yesterday & thought Watters looked completely foolish. All the "bro" talk, and walking aimlessly in a circle without giving a simple statement -- so jerky. I think the guy with the camera phone was polite & didn't get flustered. Granted, his question was idiotic, but that's why Watters looked guilty of hiding some deep dark secet about Fox.
Jun '10
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
Hey, at least he didn't grab him around the neck and slur, "WHO are YOU?"
Since he was just having fun with the guy, he should have looked shocked and said, "How did you find that out?"
Edited on Feb 14, 2011 at 9:06amJul '10
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
I don't know, kind of reminded me of the old looney tunes when the yapping dog is running along side Spike asking him "what-are-we-gonna-do-Spike?"
Dec '10
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
Of course he didn't answer. It was a stupid question.
"An unnamed insider said [fill in the blank] just makes stuff up. Is it true? Yes or No"
Why bother to dignify the question with a response? For a start, the entire premise of the question could be made up. There may be not be an "unnamed insider". It could be made up. If there is an "insider", who said something, that might not be what was said. It could be made up, or misrepresented, taken out of context, etc.
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
I loved it! Watters responds to an unserious tendentious question by critiquing the interviewer's amateurish technique. Turning the tables is great fun.
Jan '11
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
George, I don't see how you or anyone else "loved" this. The guy from ThinkProgress asked a dumb question; Jesse Watters was smug, obnoxious and, as StickerShock put it, jerky. No one wins in that scenario.
If this is what passes for wit on the right - if this is what the right's thought leaders actually think is 'guaranteed hilarity' or 'great fun' - then we deserve half of what the left says about us.
Jun '10
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
service test.
Jun '10
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
He should have just said, "no" in a very Thomas Sowell like way.
P.R. - "If you could give the president some words of advice, what would you say?"
T. Sowell - "Resign."
Jul '10
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
Matthew K. Tabor
George, I don't see how you or anyone else "loved" this. The guy from ThinkProgress asked a dumb question; Jesse Watters was smug, obnoxious and, as StickerShock put it, jerky. No one wins in that scenario.
If this is what passes for wit on the right - if this is what the right's thought leaders actually think is 'guaranteed hilarity' or 'great fun' - then we deserve half of what the left says about us. · Feb 14 at 9:42am
Yes, but have you stopped beating your wife yet?
May '10
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
I agree with StickerShock. All Watters had to do is ask, "So what's an example of Fox making stuff up? If I called you a liar without offering any details, would you feel a need to respond?"
Using a phone or handheld camera to conduct an interview alone might appear less professional to the interviewee, but it's certainly more economical.
Jun '10
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
The proper response to a inappropriate question is silence. Because a guy with a phone cam asks a question is no reason to answer him. Watters may have been sporting more than he should have been, but that is his only fault. So to repeat, asking a question does in no way imply that it must be answered. Oddly enough, this is even the case in court, though, in court silence will likely earn you a contempt citation and jail time, the witness may still choose not to answer. It is one of my peeves that when people ask me inappropriate questions they expect me to answer. What they get is silence. If they repeat the question they usually get an answer they can't deal with, as I feel no need to be diplomatic at this stage in the conversation.
Sep '10
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
Watters was the one who acted flustered and snobby. He should have stopped, looked directly into the camera, and said something to the effect of: "Unlike you, I am a professional journalist and, obviously, do not think we at Fox make stuff up. In fact, I say we present more real news than our competitors. But in order to be able to respond to your question, I need to know whom you're quoting or at least be given an example of what this supposed Fox insider asserted. You know, an actual example of something we made up." When the guy says nothing definitive in response (his question shows he can't), that's when Watters should have smiled, excused himself, and walked away. It's not fair, but Fox folks should always rise above their critics.
Dec '10
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
Jaydee_007
Matthew K. Tabor: George, I don't see how you or anyone else "loved" this. The guy from ThinkProgress asked a dumb question; Jesse Watters was smug, obnoxious and, as StickerShock put it, jerky. No one wins in that scenario.
If this is what passes for wit on the right - if this is what the right's thought leaders actually think is 'guaranteed hilarity' or 'great fun' - then we deserve half of what the left says about us.
Yes, but have you stopped beating your wife yet?
An unnamed ex-friend of yours said you haven't stopped beating your wife. Is it true? Yes or No?
Edited on Feb 14, 2011 at 10:27amJun '10
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
While I was writing proposed responses to the question asked were posted. I am decidedly against any response to the question on the grounds that an answer lends legitimacy to an inappropriate question. This is never a winning position. I'm in the deafening silence club on this one, as can be seen in my post above. Here is why: 1) any answer given is wrong, example No! Watters in the eyes of the questioner is a liar. 2) Yes! In the eyes of the questioner Fox News lies. Why Watters toyed with this guy is because, he being a media guy, knows very well that no comment = guilty as charged. His playful stance filled the air with banter that indicated that he was not cowering in the presence of the question and also that he did not think the question had merit. I know this is highly subjective. The worst thing he could have done was attempt to answer. The second worse thing would have been to say "no comment." In my view the best thing he could have done was remained silent. Again I know this is subjective.
Dec '10
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
Some context... This "an insider said" story is a hit piece from Media Matters. They claim to have interviewed a former FOXnews "insider" who has spilled the beans about how FOXnews operates - "Stuff is just made up", etc.
However, the insider is not named, nor are any examples of made up "stuff" given. The former insider does not name another FOXnews employee (except Ailes) or cite a single example. Ostensibly this is because he/she might get sued under the terms of a non-dislcosure agreement. How convenient.
I do not think FOXnews ever bothers to reply to stories reported only by Media Matters. That is good policy considering what MM is all about and how it is funded.
Jan '11
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
Nickolas
Jaydee_007
Matthew K. Tabor: George, I don't see how you or anyone else "loved" this. The guy from ThinkProgress asked a dumb question; Jesse Watters was smug, obnoxious and, as StickerShock put it, jerky. No one wins in that scenario.
If this is what passes for wit on the right - if this is what the right's thought leaders actually think is 'guaranteed hilarity' or 'great fun' - then we deserve half of what the left says about us.
Yes, but have you stopped beating your wife yet?
An unnamed ex-friend of yours said you haven't stopped beating your wife. Is it true? Yes or No? · Feb 14 at 10:26am
Edited on Feb 14 at 10:27 am
I've never been married and I've never really had any friends. Ha! #doublefail
Dec '10
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
Deleted double post made due to service failure.
Edited on Feb 14, 2011 at 11:05amSep '10
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
How did this ever get posted? Did the Think Progress guy think this benefitted him in some way? It came across as a very delete-able video.
May '10
Re: "Intrepid" Think Progress Reporter Gets Schooled by Fox News' Jesse Watters at CPAC
I really thought there was nothing funny about this video. Watters appeared to be dodging the question with nervous criticism of the cameraman rather than properly ignoring the question, or stating simply "No, that's a ridiculous question." As others have said, he could have asked for an example, but then he poses the risk of having to debate the specifics of a news story he's not familiar with.