-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Channel 5 Gun Dealer Story a Tragic Case of Blind Journalism
- Thread starter GOAL
- Start date
Channel 5 gun story
Just sent my email to the station management. Told them they may have lost a few viewers of their station after that piece. Also requested they do a follow-up segment with some pro-gun spokepeople.
commandcaddy
Just sent my email to the station management. Told them they may have lost a few viewers of their station after that piece. Also requested they do a follow-up segment with some pro-gun spokepeople.
commandcaddy
F
Finalygotabeltfed
Unlikely as it doesn't fit their agenda.
The guy in Vermont should have said "show me the money" and the instant they pulled out or showed any cash, he should have detained them and called both security and the police and had them arrested.
Patriot
NES Member
My email:
Easily the worst piece of journalism ever put to video. Can you possibly
set the bar any lower than you did with this blatant deception piece?
Have some integrity Channel 5, and at the very least get the facts correct.
There are so many wrongs and outright lies that it would easily take as
long to right this obvious hatchet job. Whomever put this together, or in
any way was responsible for it, needs to be ashamed of themselves. Just
some awful trash. It's so sad that you and your team feel that
sensationalism, at the expense of truth and fact, is worth selling out that
last vestige of honesty you might possess.
The reply:
Thank you for the email you sent in response to our Team 5 Investigates
report on illegal gun trafficking.
We appreciate your interest and opinion and would like to take this
opportunity to respond to your concerns.
Some viewers took issue with a sound bite in the report, suggesting that
surrounding states don't require an ID or background check to buy a gun .If
you watch the investigation, we show you how a federally licensed dealer
and a private seller at a gun show in Vermont said they were still willing
to illegally sell us a firearm "for the right price." It's essential to
view that comment in the context of our report, which so clearly showed
flagrant violations of the law. We are all aware of the many gun laws. The
point of our investigation was to show how willingly some gun sellers will
break them.
Other viewers have asked why we didn't speak to officials with the National
Rifle Association. In fact, we did. We made multiple attempts to arrange
an interview with the NRA, but they declined. They sent Team 5
Investigates a two-sentence response that we included in the investigation,
when we reported that others insist we don't need more gun laws but better
enforcement of the ones we already have.
More than a few of us here at Channel 5 have grown up using firearms in a
safe, responsible, and legal manner. Between our personal experience as gun
owners and users, as well as our chosen profession as journalists, we,
perhaps more than others, feel passionately about protecting our
constitutional rights. However, it's hard not to be appalled by the fact
that it was so simple for us to capture on tape blatant disregard for our
nation's gun laws, which negatively affects public safety.
In the months spent researching this report, the reporter and producer had
countless conversations with gun advocates, police, prosecutors and
criminals. All agreed that the illegal trafficking of guns is a critical
problem that they have to deal with every day.
Again, thank you for taking the time to share your opinions with Team 5
Investigates. We value feedback from our loyal viewers and will keep your
contact information if we do additional stories on this issue in the
future.
Respectfully,
WCVB-TV
Team 5 Investigates
Easily the worst piece of journalism ever put to video. Can you possibly
set the bar any lower than you did with this blatant deception piece?
Have some integrity Channel 5, and at the very least get the facts correct.
There are so many wrongs and outright lies that it would easily take as
long to right this obvious hatchet job. Whomever put this together, or in
any way was responsible for it, needs to be ashamed of themselves. Just
some awful trash. It's so sad that you and your team feel that
sensationalism, at the expense of truth and fact, is worth selling out that
last vestige of honesty you might possess.
The reply:
Thank you for the email you sent in response to our Team 5 Investigates
report on illegal gun trafficking.
We appreciate your interest and opinion and would like to take this
opportunity to respond to your concerns.
Some viewers took issue with a sound bite in the report, suggesting that
surrounding states don't require an ID or background check to buy a gun .If
you watch the investigation, we show you how a federally licensed dealer
and a private seller at a gun show in Vermont said they were still willing
to illegally sell us a firearm "for the right price." It's essential to
view that comment in the context of our report, which so clearly showed
flagrant violations of the law. We are all aware of the many gun laws. The
point of our investigation was to show how willingly some gun sellers will
break them.
Other viewers have asked why we didn't speak to officials with the National
Rifle Association. In fact, we did. We made multiple attempts to arrange
an interview with the NRA, but they declined. They sent Team 5
Investigates a two-sentence response that we included in the investigation,
when we reported that others insist we don't need more gun laws but better
enforcement of the ones we already have.
More than a few of us here at Channel 5 have grown up using firearms in a
safe, responsible, and legal manner. Between our personal experience as gun
owners and users, as well as our chosen profession as journalists, we,
perhaps more than others, feel passionately about protecting our
constitutional rights. However, it's hard not to be appalled by the fact
that it was so simple for us to capture on tape blatant disregard for our
nation's gun laws, which negatively affects public safety.
In the months spent researching this report, the reporter and producer had
countless conversations with gun advocates, police, prosecutors and
criminals. All agreed that the illegal trafficking of guns is a critical
problem that they have to deal with every day.
Again, thank you for taking the time to share your opinions with Team 5
Investigates. We value feedback from our loyal viewers and will keep your
contact information if we do additional stories on this issue in the
future.
Respectfully,
WCVB-TV
Team 5 Investigates
F
Finalygotabeltfed
They must have really not liked my email.....I didn't get a reply.![[crying]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/006.gif "Crying [crying]")
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
GaryO
NES Member
My letter.
I am very dissapointed in your attempt to portray gun owners as a group of criminals. When a supposedley unbiased news show does a story that is one sided it sends out a wrong message to the uninformed.
If you did a little more research you would have found plenty of information to counter your story including Mass general law (Chapter 140, Section 131), and Federal law (18 U.S. Code 922(a)(3)).You should have a followup story that shows the other side of the coin instead of misleading the public
I am very dissapointed in your attempt to portray gun owners as a group of criminals. When a supposedley unbiased news show does a story that is one sided it sends out a wrong message to the uninformed.
If you did a little more research you would have found plenty of information to counter your story including Mass general law (Chapter 140, Section 131), and Federal law (18 U.S. Code 922(a)(3)).You should have a followup story that shows the other side of the coin instead of misleading the public
Chris
NES Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2005
- Messages
- 13,382
- Likes
- 8,209
I love it...
They find it perfectly OK to have a person LIE on camera since the LIE can refer to people who are engaged in criminal activity. (of course, we have no idea if any criminal activity occurred because just about anything can be done with fancy editing)
If I understand this correctly, Channel 5 is essentially willing to IGNORE current laws to make a case for having more laws.
My question at this point would be:
If the parties in question have no willingness to follow the current law, what makes you think MORE laws would do anything?
And I wonder... They claim that because they didn't go get the money they didn't break any laws. Isn't there a federal law regarding the solicitation to commit a felony?
Afterall, all those pedophiles that show up at a house and are arrested didn't actually DO anything.
They find it perfectly OK to have a person LIE on camera since the LIE can refer to people who are engaged in criminal activity. (of course, we have no idea if any criminal activity occurred because just about anything can be done with fancy editing)
If I understand this correctly, Channel 5 is essentially willing to IGNORE current laws to make a case for having more laws.
My question at this point would be:
If the parties in question have no willingness to follow the current law, what makes you think MORE laws would do anything?
And I wonder... They claim that because they didn't go get the money they didn't break any laws. Isn't there a federal law regarding the solicitation to commit a felony?
Afterall, all those pedophiles that show up at a house and are arrested didn't actually DO anything.
This doesnt seem like the first time a news agency commits a crime to point that criminals commit crimes...I don't understand the logic. Its like saying "Watch us prove how easy it is to get access to pot on the streets by ouselves illegally growing it and selling it on the street."
GaryO
NES Member
I recieved the exact same response from channel 5 and this was my reply.
Why are you sending out the same response to every person that disagreed with your story? Can't you take the time to answer each one personally instead of sending out a general response. Did you try to talk with G.O.A.L? If you didn't try to talk with them you did not research the story fully. The NRA doesn't speak for all gun owners and as this was a regional story you should have taken the time to get a response from a regional group.
Gary O
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Susan M Warren" <[email protected]>
> Dear Gary:
> Thank you for the email you sent in response to our Team 5 Investigates
> report on illegal gun trafficking.
>
> We appreciate your interest and opinion and would like to take this
> opportunity to respond to your concerns.
>
> Some viewers took issue with a sound bite in the report, suggesting that
> surrounding states don't require an ID or background check to buy a gun.
> If you watch the investigation, we show you how a federally licensed dealer
> and a private seller at a gun show in Vermont said they were still willing
> to illegally sell us a firearm "for the right price." It's essential to
> view that comment in the context of our report, which so clearly showed
> flagrant violations of the law.
> We are all aware of the many gun laws. The point of our investigation was
> to show how willingly some gun sellers will break them.
>
> Other viewers have asked why we didn't speak to officials with the National
> Rifle Association. In fact, we did. We made multiple attempts to arrange
> an interview with the NRA, but they declined. They sent Team 5
> Investigates a two-sentence response that we included in the investigation,
> when we reported that others insist we don't need more gun laws but better
> enforcement of the ones we already have.
>
> More than a few of us here at Channel 5 have grown up using firearms in a
> safe, responsible, and legal manner. Between our personal experience as gun
> owners and users, as well as our chosen profession as journalists, we,
> perhaps more than others, feel passionately about protecting our
> constitutional rig hts. However, it's hard not to be appalled by the fact
> that it was so simple for us to capture on tape blatant disregard for our
> nation's gun laws, which negatively affects public safety.
>
> In the months spent researching this report, the reporter and producer had
> countless conversations with gun advocates, police, prosecutors and
> criminals.
> All agreed that the illegal trafficking of guns is a critical problem that
> they have to deal with every day.
>
> Again, thank you for taking the time to share your opinions with Team 5
> Investigates. We value feedback from our loyal viewers and will keep your
> contact information if we do additional stories on this issue in the
> future.
>
> Respectfully,
> WCVB-TV
> Team 5 Investigates
>
Why are you sending out the same response to every person that disagreed with your story? Can't you take the time to answer each one personally instead of sending out a general response. Did you try to talk with G.O.A.L? If you didn't try to talk with them you did not research the story fully. The NRA doesn't speak for all gun owners and as this was a regional story you should have taken the time to get a response from a regional group.
Gary O
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Susan M Warren" <[email protected]>
> Dear Gary:
> Thank you for the email you sent in response to our Team 5 Investigates
> report on illegal gun trafficking.
>
> We appreciate your interest and opinion and would like to take this
> opportunity to respond to your concerns.
>
> Some viewers took issue with a sound bite in the report, suggesting that
> surrounding states don't require an ID or background check to buy a gun.
> If you watch the investigation, we show you how a federally licensed dealer
> and a private seller at a gun show in Vermont said they were still willing
> to illegally sell us a firearm "for the right price." It's essential to
> view that comment in the context of our report, which so clearly showed
> flagrant violations of the law.
> We are all aware of the many gun laws. The point of our investigation was
> to show how willingly some gun sellers will break them.
>
> Other viewers have asked why we didn't speak to officials with the National
> Rifle Association. In fact, we did. We made multiple attempts to arrange
> an interview with the NRA, but they declined. They sent Team 5
> Investigates a two-sentence response that we included in the investigation,
> when we reported that others insist we don't need more gun laws but better
> enforcement of the ones we already have.
>
> More than a few of us here at Channel 5 have grown up using firearms in a
> safe, responsible, and legal manner. Between our personal experience as gun
> owners and users, as well as our chosen profession as journalists, we,
> perhaps more than others, feel passionately about protecting our
> constitutional rig hts. However, it's hard not to be appalled by the fact
> that it was so simple for us to capture on tape blatant disregard for our
> nation's gun laws, which negatively affects public safety.
>
> In the months spent researching this report, the reporter and producer had
> countless conversations with gun advocates, police, prosecutors and
> criminals.
> All agreed that the illegal trafficking of guns is a critical problem that
> they have to deal with every day.
>
> Again, thank you for taking the time to share your opinions with Team 5
> Investigates. We value feedback from our loyal viewers and will keep your
> contact information if we do additional stories on this issue in the
> future.
>
> Respectfully,
> WCVB-TV
> Team 5 Investigates
>
Last edited:
