That’s what I was getting at discussing McLuhan, above. There’s an expectation there, especially for viewers like you and me who notice the seams and rough edges.
Those interviews are sort of an in-between format called “live-to-tape”, where the interview is done live (in the sense of being uncut, although some are edited), but recorded for later playback.
Bleeping out the naughty words is considered acceptable in broadcast news as long as the bleep is audible, but cutting out or morphing over the curse words is (or perhaps was) not. It goes to what I was discussing before, making sure a statement or soundbite makes a complete statement and that nothing (not pauses, not “ums”, not body language) is removed from the clip without signalling to the audience.
Print allows a bit more latitude for cutting/“morphing” things mid-statement, since the “ums” and pauses and body language don’t matter as much when you’re reading something rather than viewing or hearing it. Even so, a writer will sometimes leave them in if she feels they’re important (mainly to show that the subject is lying or waffling about something).
Brand and reputation are critical in that regard, although increasing audience polarisation makes things tricky. Fox News has been able to convince a large number of unsophisticated or politically orthodox consumers into believing that they’re trying to accurately report things, despite decades of media analysis showing that they regularly lie and BS and that their “errors” are far too frequent and biased to actually be errors.
The normalisation of extremism by the more reputable media is the deeper problem precisely because they are making a good-faith effort to be accurate and fair. The problem with NPR or the NYT in these situations is that they’re not willing to directly address and challenge the lies and BS of their subjects, whether it’s the “Nazi next door” or Dolt-45. The same goes for The Atlantic’s decision to hire Kevin Williamson as a columnist in the interest of balance or the New Yorker’s decision to include Steve Bannon on a panel.
In either case, reputable video news brands adding this morphing technology is only going to make things worse and give bad actors cover.
It’s really hard to be transparent when using morphing tech because (unlike a cut or transitional effect like a wipe or fade) it’s a CGI special effect like Leia or Tarkin, which by definition is not intended to be perceived by the audience. This one just happened to be sloppy enough to be noticeable, but videographers will quickly learn to frame their shots and position their subjects to avoid these errors.
