I'm not sure whether he was deliberately misleading, or just assuming people wouldn't mind or care. I don't think he should have done it, but I have seen claims that seem too extreme to me. For instance, a year or two ago there was a big fuss about "misleading" BBC television interviews, and one of the offences was that when they showed the interviewer nodding in agreement, they were actually filmed nodding after the interview was over! I mean, they nodding at the time as well, but that was a different nod.
They only did it because these were shoestring interviews with only one camera available. Presumably if the BBC hadn't been doing that, then the same people would have told them off for wasting money on two cameras.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Sorry, it's just something I find unacceptable in general.
no subject
They only did it because these were shoestring interviews with only one camera available. Presumably if the BBC hadn't been doing that, then the same people would have told them off for wasting money on two cameras.
no subject
Which he's done, so I'm fairly happy.