James O'Keefe tries a Sting on anti-fraking film maker Josh Fox

[telemann.livejournal.com]

On Wednesday, conservative activist and controversial video sting artist James O’Keefe made an appearance in Cannes during the Film Festival with a new, secretly recorded 20-minute video that he said exposes the hypocrisy of two environmentalist documentarians and two Hollywood actors. At the end of the clip, after Josh and Rebecca Tickell, Mariel Hemingway, and Ed Begley Jr. appear to have unwittingly agreed to accept financing for an anti-fracking film from Middle East oil interests, O’Keefe claims he’s caught other allegedly altruistic actors and filmmakers in his trap, teasing a clip of a phone conversation with filmmaker Josh Fox.

But this time, O’Keefe wasn’t the only one making secret recordings. Left more than a little suspicious by years of vicious—and often surreptitious—attacks from the natural gas industry and its supporters following the premiere of his 2010 Oscar-nominated anti-fracking documentary, Gasland, and its 2012 sequel, Gasland II, Fox taped his interaction with one of O’Keefe’s minions and documented the elaborate lengths they went to entrap him.

Source.

Many thanks to malasadas for the heads-up about O'Keefe's latest adventures.

Comments

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Video in question:

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

Aren't his 15 minutes of fame long expired?

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

And what is the point? A documentary filmmaker agreed to take money from a questionable source so all environmentalists are tools of the middle east investors?

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

It nakedly reveals the anti-American, anti-capitalist streak
that lies in we eco-terrorists!

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

[mylaptopisevil.livejournal.com]

I wonder when O'Keefe is going to highlight that a "middle east investor" is one of the largest shareholders (or the largest after Murdoch?) for FOX News.

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Exactly. Where DO you draw the line?

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

But that one is real.

[usekh.livejournal.com]

Last time he was proven to be a lying deceptive fuckstain, so yeah. Not surprised at all

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

I heard this on the radio last night and was curious as how it would be spun.

Having been around the industry"" (or more precis, people involved) that this happened is not really a shock.
That Ed Begley Jr. was involved is what saddens and surprises.

[weswilson]

I'll bite... that what happened? What saddens and surprises you?

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

The people one gets into bed with raising money for a project.
Ed Begley is considered the "real deal" in regards to environmental issues.

[weswilson]

If I can put food into the mouths of hungry children, I will take money from murderers. Without editorial input or leveraged funding, the idea that a person delivering a good they feel morally strong about becomes moot. If a convicted pedophile wanted to give his money to a good cause, should we not allow him to do it?

What is sad about someone accepting money to do something they feel strongly about?

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Put very simplistic it's pk to to bad if the end result is a net good?

Personally I think it is an interesting individual moral dilemma; juxtaposed with should I do good if the result is a net bad (unintended consequences). My feeling is there is no general one size fits all answer. It boils down to how much one is willing to compromise one's standards to further their agenda. For some reason this has reminded me of a quote (perhaps apocraphy) from a famous actress when she finally became a star (slightly paraphrased for my sensitivities) "At least now I don't have to give a blow job unless I want to."

[weswilson]

Would you take money from a murderer to feed starving children?

How is TAKING money from someone who is amoral a bad thing? GIVING it to them is one thing... promoting their cause is another troublesome one... allowing someone amoral to be influential in other fields could also be bad... being a business partner with someone and allowing them to make money off your venture is bad... but taking someone's money with no strings attached seems innocuous to me

[hurleyman.livejournal.com]

I think the real question is: If we only took money from those deemed morally fit, would we have any charity, whatsoever anymore?

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Well, apparently the NAACP has given at least part of the money back to Dona;d Sterling, so I guess there is a line somewhere ;)

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

My best answer to that is Maybe.

Ya know, what we have done is shift from a specific to generalities. The main concern if taking money from an amoral source is not a "bad thing" (and in ths case there was an agenda, I assume you have listened to the discussion) why the hiding of the source and funneling the money thru "acceptable" organizations?

I would agree that taking money with "no strings attached" is innocuous. Cynic in me wonders just how often that happens.

Bottom line: The motivation for the funding was to stop fracking to keep America dependent on foreign oil (made clear in the discussion) The motivation (hopefully) of the recipients is to stop fracking because they believe it's bad. Justification lies in the eye of the beholder...

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

" America dependent on foreign oil (made clear in the discussion) "

The "discussion" from the video I posted was heavily edited. I couldn't be sure what was said because they didn't just let the tape roll.

Also, none of this had any bearing on climate change.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

It just occurred to me; should the NAACP have returned Donald Sterling's money?

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

as curious as how it would be spun

Yeah, because the clumsy entrapment of some netflix filmmaker we never heard of needed spin.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

And that my friend is the spin.
Hiding where the money is coming from isn't deception or fraud, it's doing what has to be done to get the message out

(what, you never heard of Ed Begley Jr. or Muriel Hemmingway? ;) )

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Where the money comes from for what? Some made for netflix film by a film maker no one heard of?

Did you see "Fuel"? Anyone in this group ever mention it?

Clearly the totality of Hollywood is bought out by that pretend sheik. Clearly climate change isn't real because O'keefe played "yes men".

And just who are you accusing of spin?

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Spin may have been the wrong word.
Hypocracy may have been better (which if it had been a conservative entrapped there would have been
at least three posts pointing that out.

*sigh* Dude, I am more amused by this than anything else, this is the way the game is played by independent producers
I have a friend who would sell his soul to the devil to be able to produce his latest project, and a nephew who may have..
My very first comment dealt with the who, not the what or why.
I am at a loss to understand why you seem to be so defensive about it or maybe I have a perception problem :)

[phildegrave]

...or maybe I have a perception problem :)

Maybe your constant feigning of cluelessness is off-putting to some.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

There is that possibility.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

The analogy is to the "Yes Men" on the left I think.

My mood was ruined because I got into a beef with someone on a job site. I don't like violence. I apologize.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

I looked into the film. Apparently, the director Josh Tickell drove his biodiesel van around and make a documentary about it. Clearly he represents big hollywood.

Okeefe found someone desperate for money and entrapped him to apparently compromise his morals. Mabye he figured any dollar out of the hands of the oil sheik would be better off with his film? What could this possibly say about climate change?

Its funny because I'm sure Dick Cheney's oil connections are pure as the driven snow. No influence there. But an independent documentary director, that's big corruption.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

"Its funny because I'm sure Dick Cheney's oil connections are pure as the driven snow. No influence there. But an independent documentary director, that's big corruption"

I am curious as to what I wrote that sparked such heavy sarcasm.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

I had a shitty day. I think that's most of it. Sorry.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Meh, I should apologize for thinking it might be anything other than that :D

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

If only they were as interested in finding out where the money in the pocket of politicians comes from...

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

From your mouth to investigative reporters ears.

[phildegrave]

O'Keefe is an investigative reporter?

Now who's spinning here?

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Ha, exactly!

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Really? Whatever.

[telemann.livejournal.com]

No, its Que-ever!

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Spin? I guess if anfalacious's "they" was referring to Okeefe, perhaps. Or if I was claiming he is an investigative reporter (which I suppose in the over all context COULD be inferred) of which I have no idea , maybe. What I find odd that felt it necessary to single me out, since I can't remember ever "attacking you" or when I might have offended you; or if you are just like the t-man and just don't like it that I exist.

Let's review: a: time would be better spent investigating politicians.
me: agreeing with a slight twist to an idiom.
you: aha, you are spinning.

OK. But you should understand why I will just ignore you in the future.

[op-tech-glitch.livejournal.com]

As Grumpy Cat would so succinctly put it...why isn't he in jail?