Sean Penn's 'interview' with El Chapo

Cliffy6745 said:

PJ_Soul said:

Cliffy6745 said:

PJ_Soul said:

Cliffy6745 said:

PJ_Soul said:

It never occurred to me to be bothered by this, and I don't really get why anyone is. I think it's pretty fucking interesting thing to do, actually. I don't understand what is supposed to be douchey about it.
The liberal Ted Nugent? Gimme a break. That's silly.

By giving Guzman last say in the article he is serving as a mouth piece for a scumbag

Oh, pooh, lol. You're over thinking it IMO.

Not at all. You don't see anything wrong with telling the public a story that a man responsible for thousands of murders wants told? There's a reason he didn't go to anyone with dignity...

Sorry, that's ridiculous.
Where were you when Netflix made a whole critically acclaimed series about Pablo Escobar? And I think the WW2 analogy is apt. How many documentaries about Hilter's life are there? And serial killers? And war lords. Stalin. Etc etc etc etc. This is no different.

Ummm, it is quite different. Stalin and Hitler do not have final say about the content of the documentaries. For the sake of this stupid analogy, if Hitler had final say on the content of a documentary about his life, would you take it seriously?

Narcos is fucking awesome and is entertainment. This is supposed journalism, at its absolute worst.

Are you serious? I would fascinated to see a documentary that Hitler made about himself. I think most people would be.
There is NOTHING wrong with a story that is allowed to be from a criminal's perspective. It is a legitimate perspective. ALL perspectives are legitimate, and btw, this is also entertainment and intrigue. I honestly have no idea what you're worried about here. What exactly is your concern? It is actually valuable to know Chapo's perspective on things. It's informative and relevant. It's not like he's got the final word or anything.

Enkidu said:

Finally found it - the Larry Wilmore thing. It's hilarious.

http://www.salon.com/2016/01/12/wilmore_mocks_sean_penns_el_chapo_story_you_know_its_bad_when_fox_and_friends_is_questioning_your_journalistic_credibility/

"Rolling Stone has editors, don't they?"

PJ_Soul said:

Cliffy6745 said:

PJ_Soul said:

Cliffy6745 said:

PJ_Soul said:

Cliffy6745 said:

PJ_Soul said:

It never occurred to me to be bothered by this, and I don't really get why anyone is. I think it's pretty fucking interesting thing to do, actually. I don't understand what is supposed to be douchey about it.
The liberal Ted Nugent? Gimme a break. That's silly.

By giving Guzman last say in the article he is serving as a mouth piece for a scumbag

Oh, pooh, lol. You're over thinking it IMO.

Not at all. You don't see anything wrong with telling the public a story that a man responsible for thousands of murders wants told? There's a reason he didn't go to anyone with dignity...

Sorry, that's ridiculous.
Where were you when Netflix made a whole critically acclaimed series about Pablo Escobar? And I think the WW2 analogy is apt. How many documentaries about Hilter's life are there? And serial killers? And war lords. Stalin. Etc etc etc etc. This is no different.

Ummm, it is quite different. Stalin and Hitler do not have final say about the content of the documentaries. For the sake of this stupid analogy, if Hitler had final say on the content of a documentary about his life, would you take it seriously?

Narcos is fucking awesome and is entertainment. This is supposed journalism, at its absolute worst.

Are you serious? I would fascinated to see a documentary that Hitler made about himself. I think most people would be.
There is NOTHING wrong with a story that is allowed to be from a criminal's perspective. It is a legitimate perspective. ALL perspectives are legitimate, and btw, this is also entertainment and intrigue. I honestly have no idea what you're worried about here. What exactly is your concern? It is actually valuable to know Chapo's perspective on things. It's informative and relevant. It's not like he's got the final word or anything.

Oh I agree it would be interesting and I would watch but that is very different from how this is positioned. Would you view it as journalism or propaganda?

Have you read it? he did have the final word?

My problem at the heart of it is that journalists who tell the truth about this guy are murdered but Sean penn Acts like his buddy, writes the story Guzman wants told and people give him credit. If penn had the balls to tell the actual story then I would be fine with it

PJ_Soul said:

Cliffy6745 said:

If this had been Russell Crowe, would anyone here give half a fuck to defend him or is it because of a certain relationship with a certain musician?

I have no idea. That's not where I am coming from. If it wasn't Sean Penn, but instead Barabara Walters or someone, would you have such a problem with it??

I can promise you that Barbara Walters wouldn't give this guy final say, so no. If this were any celebrity posing as a journalist, I would have a problem with it

Cliffy6745 said:

PJ_Soul said:

Cliffy6745 said:

If this had been Russell Crowe, would anyone here give half a fuck to defend him or is it because of a certain relationship with a certain musician?

I have no idea. That's not where I am coming from. If it wasn't Sean Penn, but instead Barabara Walters or someone, would you have such a problem with it??

I can promise you that Barbara Walters wouldn't give this guy final say, so no. If this were any celebrity posing as a journalist, I would have a problem with it

He doesn't have the final say. If a law were enacted stating that no one can ever write or talk about El Chapo again I suppose he would....

Where does this iron clad "chapo gets the final say" coming from?

Seems to me Penn gets the final say. That's how interviews work.

rgambs said:

Where does this iron clad "chapo gets the final say" coming from?

Seems to me Penn gets the final say. That's how interviews work.

Yeah, I don't get it either.

PJ_Soul said:

Cliffy6745 said:

PJ_Soul said:

Cliffy6745 said:

If this had been Russell Crowe, would anyone here give half a fuck to defend him or is it because of a certain relationship with a certain musician?

I have no idea. That's not where I am coming from. If it wasn't Sean Penn, but instead Barabara Walters or someone, would you have such a problem with it??

I can promise you that Barbara Walters wouldn't give this guy final say, so no. If this were any celebrity posing as a journalist, I would have a problem with it

"Posing" as a journalist? Huh? Sean Penn just went and did what he did. There were no expectations for him to meet. He can employ as much or as little journalistic integrity as he feels like precisely because he isn't a news journalist.

PJ_Soul said:

Cliffy6745 said:

PJ_Soul said:

Cliffy6745 said:

If this had been Russell Crowe, would anyone here give half a fuck to defend him or is it because of a certain relationship with a certain musician?

I have no idea. That's not where I am coming from. If it wasn't Sean Penn, but instead Barabara Walters or someone, would you have such a problem with it??

I can promise you that Barbara Walters wouldn't give this guy final say, so no. If this were any celebrity posing as a journalist, I would have a problem with it

"Posing" as a journalist? Huh? Sean Penn just went and did what he did. There were no expectations for him to meet. He can employ as much or as little journalistic integrity as he feels like precisely because he isn't a news journalist.

I would assume that if Rolling Stone publishes a non fiction story based on an interview with the biggest drug lord in the world, that whoever is in the byline, celebrity or not, is considered a journalist. Is that asking too much? Rolling Stone labeled him some type of journalist and gave him that credibility by publishing this the way they did. This isn't a story about cat videos on the internet, it is about one of the most violent human beings in the world.

The expectations he should meet are the expectations that Rolling Stone should have for their stories, which are clearly not very high.

PJ_Soul said:

Cliffy6745 said:

PJ_Soul said:

rgambs said:

Where does this iron clad "chapo gets the final say" coming from?

Seems to me Penn gets the final say. That's how interviews work.

Yeah, I don't get it either.

Penn did not get the final say and that is not how THIS interview worked. It was agreed upon before hand that prior to being published El Chapo would approve the content and he did.

So? I don't understand why this bothers you. Him approving something to be published isn't him getting the final word. Anyone can say anything they want about him and in reaction to this thing.

Semantics. If he wanted things changed they would have been changed.

Do you think the NY Times would have published this? This type of nonsense belongs on Buzzfeed, not a publication with a pretty rich journalistic history.

Cliffy6745 said:

PJ_Soul said:

Cliffy6745 said:

PJ_Soul said:

rgambs said:

Where does this iron clad "chapo gets the final say" coming from?

Seems to me Penn gets the final say. That's how interviews work.

Yeah, I don't get it either.

Penn did not get the final say and that is not how THIS interview worked. It was agreed upon before hand that prior to being published El Chapo would approve the content and he did.

So? I don't understand why this bothers you. Him approving something to be published isn't him getting the final word. Anyone can say anything they want about him and in reaction to this thing.

Semantics. If he wanted things changed they would have been changed.

Do you think the NY Times would have published this? This type of nonsense belongs on Buzzfeed, not a publication with a pretty rich journalistic history.

So you are simply looking at this from the perspective of a media snob? If it's not good enough for the NY Times in your opinion, it shouldn't exist?