Up at Big Journalism. James O’Keefe and David Kernell are two people who committed vastly different actions, in terms of severity, but only one was excoriated by the state media.
In response to one of the comments: ACORN’s existence at the time of O’Keefe’s exposé was merely a front to “help the poor” while exploiting the poor and using them as voting blocs for political ideologies which seek to further enslave them while funneling money to advance its agenda. ACORN wasn’t “helping the poor.” It took advantage of them. Ask whistleblower Anita Moncrief about that.
I highlight the two cases and give several different examples of the different treatment of both men:
For fun, I decided to search Media Matters’ website to see what they’ve written about alleged hacker David Kernell, as they made clear just how important “ethics” and “transparency” are to them during James O’Keefe’s NOLA story hit — the story wherein they acted as both judge and jury and became the hypeman to the witch hunt (the charges of which were severely reduced and amount to nothing compared to that which Kernell is charged). Because they set their own bar, I expected to see a multitude of pieces discussing how email hacking is no good, regardless where you lie in the political spectrum. As of April 24, 2010, here are the comparisons.
