Oh Those Jolly Funsters at CNN

[Bruzilla]

I was watching the inaugural on the TV in our cafeteria, and they had the subtitles on since it's hard to hear over the talking. The monitors were tuned to CNN, and I was watching Dick Cheney getting sworn in when I noticed a "goof" on the subtitles. When Cheney recited the statement "that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion," the subtitles read "that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of invasion."

Now, not to stir the conspiracy pot, but c'mon. This same oath has been in use since we've had oaths, and it's not like this statement is something off the cuff. Plus there's no way to mistype evasion as invasion, so was this an innocent misunderstanding or some CNN POS's little joke. You be the judge.

 

[vraiblonde]

You be the judge.

That's a pretty coincidental slip o' the lip, dontcha think?

 

[Bruzilla]

Me thinks so!

 

[MerF]

I think it's hilarious!

 

[Llwynog]

You be the judge.

It's a live event. Someone is typing those suptitles as he or she hears them. There's no time editting, proof reading, or spell checking. It's a job I could never do.

 

[Spoiled]

maybe its not someone typing but some computer voice-type thing??

 

[Lenny]

maybe its not someone typing but some computer voice-type thing??

It's someone typing.

 

[pvineswinger]

maybe its not someone typing but some computer voice-type thing??

I did an internship at CNN and it's someone typing. And CNN has been nicknames the "clinton new network" if that says anything. (very liberal bunch)

 

[Bruzilla]

I think it's a bit of a stretch to see it as a typo when they managed to get every other word right and the one word they get wrong could be seen as a slam against Cheney.

 

[SmallTown]

I think it's a bit of a stretch to see it as a typo when they managed to get every other word right and the one word they get wrong could be seen as a slam against Cheney.

oh for god's sake Bru, not EVERYTHING is a big democrat conspiracy! I was actually proud of you a week ago or so, when you had negative stuff to say (don't even remember the topic) and you DIDN'T blame the democrats. I thought maybe either the shock treatments were helping, or maybe the extra sunshine in Florida.

For live broadcasts it works just like a court reporter. You really don't have time to think when using one of those machines. If you watch closed captioning, even on shows that aren't live, you see all kinds of different problems. You just happened to point out this one, in what one could presume is part of your ongoing attempt to show how corrupt the dems are, that they would even change a word in a speech given.
I didn't hear you #####ing and whining when they were modifying Bush's speeches for the archives to get rid of the Bushisms

 

[vraiblonde]

oh for god's sake Bru, not EVERYTHING is a big democrat conspiracy!

ST, will you at least admit that it's a rather interesting coincidence?

 

[SmallTown]

ST, will you at least admit that it's a rather interesting coincidence?

Not really. I see closed captioning all the time at the gym, quite often it isn't that good. Especially news broadcasts. Heck, if that was the only mistake in the whole speech as Bru says, I would say they must have had one of their better people doing that job.

 

[Voter2002]

Not really. I see closed captioning all the time at the gym, quite often it isn't that good. Especially news broadcasts. Heck, if that was the only mistake in the whole speech as Bru says, I would say they must have had one of their better people doing that job.

Come on ST...it's not the first time CNN has been caught doing dirty tricks against the Bush administration:

http://forums.somd.com/showthread.php?t=35878&highlight=CNN

 

[vraiblonde]

Not really. I see closed captioning all the time at the gym, quite often it isn't that good.

I see it all the time too - shoot, the other day I was watching the news and the transcriber was definitely ESL, there were so many mistakes.

But it makes it even more suspicious if there were no mistakes except this one. I will accept that it was a Freudian slip but not that it was a common typo.

 

[Bruzilla]

I doth think ST protests too much... perhaps he knows something! All I'm saying is it's a stretch to be a coincidence. As for revising speeches, that's nothing new. Everyone in Congress officially "goes on the record" by first stating they reserve the right to "revise and extend my remarks".

 

[Lenny]

For live broadcasts it works just like a court reporter. You really don't have time to think when using one of those machines.

However, for a Presidential and Vice-Presidential inauguration, the oath of office is not ad lib, it's written into statute and is known to everyone well before the event. So tell us once again how CNN blew this one single word in this oath of office.

 

[SmallTown]

However, for a Presidential and Vice-Presidential inauguration, the oath of office is not ad lib, it's written into statute and is known to everyone well before the event. So tell us once again how CNN blew this one single word in this oath of office.

Well in all fairness, maybe this person is use to Bush speaking and knows everything is ad lib, even an oath such as this