CNN caught editing wrestler's answer

That was a bizarre edit. Would you have done the same thing if it was a quote in a story?

 

A bad edit, no doubt, done for expediency to get it into the time allotted.

 

I watched the hour-long show and CNN saved the Cena interview for the last three minutes.

 

No, but I understand why it was done. Don't necessarily agree, but understand.

 

He doesn't contradict himself at all. His point at the end was that he can't tell anyone that he hasn't used steroids because people will believe that he has anyway.

 

They used that part, didn't they? And he didn't say it very well so it makes it seem even worse for him.

 

Ace, I disagree. He may have stumbled in the middle, but his point at the beginning and at the end were very concise and clear. They chose a bad part, likely on purpose, because it fit their story THEY wanted to do better. They could have chosen a clearer part, closer to the meaning, that was just as long.

 

Also, if someone gives a definitive answer to your question, but then rambles on and on allowing for a different interpretation, you can't be selective. You can use the whole thing to let the guy hang himself and look stupid, but you can't take out something so clear as that. At least, I would never do that or endorse my paper doing it.

 

I wouldn't either, but TV is different. You can't really cut and paste together certain parts or paraphrase as easily.

 

So they cut the "absolutely not," which is certainly expedient, and leave in the rambling quote? Makes sense to me.

 

On the other hand, the "absolutely not" sure looses a lot of its definitive meaning when he starts rambling.