Fesitvus! But only for Trump...

[Benton]

(11-22-2016, 05:32 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: If Scalia would had opened the floor for questions, then the recording could begin since questions come fast and furious and no matter how fast you can write, a reporter wouldn't have been able to keep up.

I can understand why someone would say "No Recording" when that person is to give a statement or speech. Since a recording can be edited to make it sound like something else was said and having what was said in your own voice even if corrected later, that damage will be done and no amount of evidence will change it.

Anyone can say, "Something needs to be done about illegal immigration. It's a drain on our system and we are losing money hand over fist." a reporter or someone with an agenda can easily remover the word "Illegal" and make it sound as if that person is against immigration.

Good point, but it's more about federal wire tapping laws. Per the law, you can record someone you're having a conversation with; asking them a question and them responding (even if it's 'no comment') generally meets what most judges would consider requirements for a conversation.

As far as the last part, that's always a concern. But it goes back to ethics and credibility. Real journalists (not tv infotainment hosts who are just there to drive ratings) know their job only exists as long as what they write is the truth. Not the interpretation of the truth, but the actual things that happen, are said, or are in records. But real journalists are disappearing faster than high paying manufacturing jobs and honest politicians.