The Unknown Known - Errol Morris

February 23, 2014

The question of how and why we come to believe lies fascinates filmmaker Errol Morris.

Guest(s): 

Comments

Listening closely [once worked in the biz], I wished Ms. Strainchamps had pursued a line of questioning with more context in mind. America had funded the war in Indo-China even while the French were still fighting it. The book Reporting Vietnam I notes the first American casualty there died in the Eisenhower Administration. Since this was my generation's war [ah the Universal Draft], the Tonkin incident seems like an asterisk in something bound to happen & NOT by accident.

The subject, why we accept lies, is a very good one. Too bad WPR/NPR/PBS/CPB (in this case TTBOOK and Strainchamps) act out the bizarre idea they're part of the solution, not the problem.

And Morris is a funny (bad) guest for this very important subject, furthering the mockery of reality (which is sometimes conscious but usually unconscious. As Morris himself says, likely not even realizing his self-description, incompetence often doesn't even recognize itself. (He didn't say it that concisely but he said it. And he should've said that when it rarely does recognize itself, it denies itself.) Hollywood gave the clown an Oscar, but as I showed in a University of California newspaper piece a few years ago, his "documentary" "The Fog of War" is loaded with factual errors. Arguably a few lies too, but mainly "just" incompetent, factual errors. See http://archive.dailycal.org/article.php?id=106268

CPB's problem, like that of the Post, Times, Journal, Smithsonian, leading Brit papers, all "top" media -- and academe -- is rarely lies (though they surely occur) but constant, simple, factual, academic incompetence in *history, geography, science and math* -- and their response behaviors when notified of error are even worse, as I've begun documenting in WPR. Got Kathleen Dunn on the phone last week and she was pathetic, acting like even the notion of legion uncorrected factual errors was ludicrous. Let's see what they say when lists are published, as a tiny part of years of vst files on CPB, themselves part of vastly larger files on "top" media and academe. I've decided to this point to conduct the study almost totally in private; articles such as the one cited above number only 30-40, almost all erased from the web. The files can support thousands.

Wake up all. While it's good for a "quality" outlet to treat such as falsehood -- if they do so truthfully and accurately enough, and this segment's subjects are okay -- when will they present themselves as perps? They won't; they will continue resisting doing so with desperate fanaticism (often worse than Dunn's); and -- as the segment also noted, but for others -- likely even after they've been metaphorically smashed in the head with a 2X4. I'll be doing that. It seems I'm the only person who both can and intends to, at least in English in the West.

The subject, why we accept lies, is a very good one. Too bad WPR/NPR/PBS/CPB (in this case TTBOOK and Strainchamps) act out the bizarre idea they're part of the solution, not the problem.

And Morris is a funny (bad) guest for this very important subject, furthering the mockery of reality (which is sometimes conscious but usually unconscious. As Morris himself says, likely not even realizing his self-description, incompetence often doesn't even recognize itself. [He didn't say it that concisely but he said it. And he should've said that when it rarely does recognize itself, it denies itself.]) Hollywood gave the clown an Oscar, but as I showed in a University of California newspaper piece a few years ago, his "documentary" "The Fog of War" is loaded with factual errors. Arguably a few lies too, but mainly "just" incompetent, factual errors. See http://archive.dailycal.org/article.php?id=106268

CPB's problem, like that of the Post, Times, Journal, Smithsonian, leading Brit papers, all "top" media -- and academe -- is rarely lies (though they surely occur) but constant, simple, factual, academic incompetence in *history, geography, science and math* -- and their response behaviors when notified of error are even worse, as I've begun documenting in WPR. Got Kathleen Dunn on the phone last week and she was pathetic, acting like even the notion of legion uncorrected factual errors was ludicrous. Let's see what they say when lists are published, as a tiny part of years of vast files on CPB, themselves part of vastly larger files on "top" media and academe. I've decided to this point to conduct the study almost totally in private; articles such as the one cited above number only 30-40, almost all erased from the web by the errant, guilty, embarrassed and above all angry, and those working for them. The files can support thousands.

Wake up all. While it's good for a "quality" outlet to treat such as falsehood -- if they do so truthfully and accurately enough, and this segment's subjects are okay -- when will they present themselves as perps? They won't; they will continue resisting doing so with desperate fanaticism (often worse than Dunn's); and -- as the segment also noted, but for others -- likely even after they've been metaphorically smashed in the head with a 2X4. I'll be doing that. It seems I'm the only person who both can and intends to, at least in English in the West.

Interesting how Mr. Powell has to correct his own incompetence. He can't even stand himself-although he is a lot easier criticizing his own pathetic inaccuracies than others.