NBC didn't make the decision, a manager did. Managers make these kinds of decisions daily. I wonder why he thought he could get away with it? What does that say about the culture there?

 

I don't think that it says anything about the culture unless it is part of a pattern.

Can't see that big of a mistake being simply poor editing.

 

I'm commenting here without watching the video or reading anything about it beyond this thread, but I think mistakes happen fairly often. While it's a little different I don't know how many times I've seen a prominent newspaper or live broadcast mistakenly display the generic placeholder for an article or segment. Football season is good for a couple of these follies. Same with 24-hour news channels. Fox News recently used a picture of Tina Fey instead of Sarah Palin for a story, for instance. I can certainly see where someone would make an error scrambling to get something on the screen in short notice. Of course, it certainly could have been deliberate too, but it's not out of the question that it was simply an oversight. Considering they left out "indivisible" as well, which is seemingly random, I'm leaning more toward the oversight explanation.

I'm commenting here without watching the video or reading anything about it beyond this thread, but I think mistakes happen fairly often. While it's a little different I don't know how many times I've seen a prominent newspaper or live broadcast mistakenly display the generic placeholder for an article or segment. Football season is good for a couple of these follies. Same with 24-hour news channels. Fox News recently used a picture of Tina Fey instead of Sarah Palin for a story, for instance. I can certainly see where someone would make an error scrambling to get something on the screen in short notice. Of course, it certainly could have been deliberate too, but it's not out of the question that it was simply an oversight. Considering they left out "indivisible" as well, which is seemingly random, I'm leaning more toward the oversight explanation.

 

Habib, if you take the time to watch the video, you'll soon find one thing out...this was not done live in a production truck. This was a piece that was put together well in advance. Editing was done ahead of time, and not on-the-fly. Yes, I've seen the types of mistakes that you've mentioned before, especially on short notice (done live). But, this would be akin to someone airing a commercial on TV and then only after it aired, that there was a mistake in it.

"Dad, why did you call RockMom a witch?" Its getting close to the season. I replied. Now, I did mention "Blink," so the genie aspect was there too.

"Dad, why did you call RockMom a witch?" Its getting close to the season. I replied. Now, I did mention "Blink," so the genie aspect was there too.

 

:lol: Tell him no offense taken! :lol: I figured you were just calling me magical or mystical...in a good way of course.

I'm commenting here without watching the video or reading anything about it beyond this thread, but I think mistakes happen fairly often. While it's a little different I don't know how many times I've seen a prominent newspaper or live broadcast mistakenly display the generic placeholder for an article or segment. Football season is good for a couple of these follies. Same with 24-hour news channels. Fox News recently used a picture of Tina Fey instead of Sarah Palin for a story, for instance. I can certainly see where someone would make an error scrambling to get something on the screen in short notice. Of course, it certainly could have been deliberate too, but it's not out of the question that it was simply an oversight. Considering they left out "indivisible" as well, which is seemingly random, I'm leaning more toward the oversight explanation.

 

This was the opening of the final round of the US Open, wasn't it? I think this would get much more scrutiny than your examples. How many times do you think the writer, producer,editor and person with final approval have said the pledge in their lifetimes? Just can't see it being an oversight. I did find it interesting that NBC's apology still didn't mention "Under God or Indivisible".

This was the opening of the final round of the US Open, wasn't it? I think this would get much more scrutiny than your examples. How many times do you think the writer, producer,editor and person with final approval have said the pledge in their lifetimes? Just can't see it being an oversight. I did find it interesting that NBC's apology still didn't mention "Under God or Indivisible".

I am not necessarily offended and can understand why it should not be in there, but that is a different debate all together. I never got that memo that it was removed. I guess you could say that is where my frustration would be. It is a Congressionally adopted pledge, is it not? If we feel it needs to be changed, then change it. But there is a large segment which feels the word "God" should not be uttered - and they may have a legit case for that - but to pick that kind of a stage to poke at the highly populated which would be offended was probably not in good form.

Well, they (My comments) "Jive" for me all thats what counts.

 

My comments meant (not jiving for you) was saying God discovered America, God gave our fathers this land, "One nation under who? God created the "fathers". Under God was put in 1954 before most of were born so we grew up saying and hearing it that way, so who changed it? NBC (man) which I mentioned as changing and not God. On the POUS "dragging his feet", I was only one, and and I don't remember the other stuff being important as GOD being removed for the pledge. Love the word and song "Jive talking".

 

Hatz, how do you feel about what I "Jived" about how man is again messing with a "GOD thing"? Wasn't a mistake NBC has editors I'm sure.

 

Larry, did you really post this?

 

"God Discovered America." Really? God Created the land mass we call America, surely.

 

"God Gave our Fathers this land." Really? Poor Native Americans that were slaughtered never knew God was so angry with them.

 

You don't believe the desegregation and prejudicial society that Eisenhower "drug his feet on" was as important as a phrase in a pledge.

 

I don't know what to say on that one at all. If you really think that lip services like a pledge supercede the actions then I don't know what else to say.

 

For what it's worth that great indivisible nation under God added that phrase when schools, restaurants, business and society in many part of this country were divided by color of skin. Wow is all I can say.

I am not necessarily offended and can understand why it should not be in there, but that is a different debate all together. I never got that memo that it was removed. I guess you could say that is where my frustration would be. It is a Congressionally adopted pledge, is it not? If we feel it needs to be changed, then change it. But there is a large segment which feels the word "God" should not be uttered - and they may have a legit case for that - but to pick that kind of a stage to poke at the highly populated which would be offended was probably not in good form.

 

 

:thumb:

Been gone to FCA camp all week, yes Hatz I said it.

The poll results in this thread amaze me and make me laugh. I have seen 4 different national polls on this topic and they have all been completely one-sided showing complete opposite results of what's being displayed here. Not sure how to interpret that.

I guess that it is the scientist in me, but again, I ask, what would NBC gain in doing this purposefully? Do you think that they are naive enough believe that it wouldn't spark a large outcry?

 

I believe there are certain in power that want to change this country to be what they thing it should be and removing God from it is part of their view.

 

There are couple of articles/documentaries that have shown that the leaders in most of the media markets are staunch liberals and continually attack conservatives with the way they show them in sitcoms/movies/edited clips.

 

And like I said at the beginning, they want this country to become more like their view and they use their position to "edit" pieces to give the view they want given.

I believe there are certain in power that want to change this country to be what they thing it should be and removing God from it is part of their view.

 

There are couple of articles/documentaries that have shown that the leaders in most of the media markets are staunch liberals and continually attack conservatives with the way they show them in sitcoms/movies/edited clips.

 

And like I said at the beginning, they want this country to become more like their view and they use their position to "edit" pieces to give the view they want given.

 

Probably true. What's your issue with it? If any

I believe there are certain in power that want to change this country to be what they thing it should be and removing God from it is part of their view.

 

There are couple of articles/documentaries that have shown that the leaders in most of the media markets are staunch liberals and continually attack conservatives with the way they show them in sitcoms/movies/edited clips.

 

And like I said at the beginning, they want this country to become more like their view and they use their position to "edit" pieces to give the view they want given.

 

But hasn't this always been the case? :idunno:

 

The Historians have always "edited" the story to make the victor look better and the vanquished appear worse. How often in US History Class was Wounded Knee mentioned but there was always a full page or more on "Custer's Last Stand."

I believe there are certain in power that want to change this country to be what they thing it should be and removing God from it is part of their view...And like I said at the beginning, they want this country to become more like their view and they use their position to "edit" pieces to give the view they want given.

So why did they end up apologizing? It makes no sense.