That a certain bias exists in mainstream media and amongst the American elite is not a new revelation. Determining how that warped worldview presents itself in the coverage of particular stories requires one to do their own research. That can be arduous, but it helps to understand that bias can be boiled down to two categories: deception and omission.
The Daily Wire’s Candace Owens found both at work in one of the most popular documentaries of the past decade, Netflix’s “Making a Murderer.” In her new, investigative documentary “Convicting a Murderer,” Owens exposes heavy doses of both deception and omission.
If you were to ask the “MAM” creators and co-directors, Moira Demos and Laura Ricciardi, the documentary was a smashing success. In 2016, the pair claimed they “achieved the goals we set out, we wanted to achieve and we think that this is a social justice documentary, we think it adds value to society, we’ve always hoped it would always promote a dialogue about the criminal justice system.”
But that wasn’t their only intention with the documentary about Steven Avery, a man who was wrongfully convicted of rape, only to be charged with murder by the same justice system that imprisoned him years before.
In 2018, Demos and Ricciardi were asked, “Do you think about it as a documentary and put things in front of people with no fingerprints of your own on it or a storytelling exercise in which you are advocating for an argument?”
Demos responded, “I think the answer may be neither … because you know documentary is not journalism, it is an art form, and this is a narrative documentary, so we had chosen Steven Avery as our main character and we had chosen him because of his incredible unique status, as someone who had been failed by the system in the mid-80s and was stepping back into it.”
Well, if the documentary is supposed to be art that forms an impression-making narrative, perhaps we should look at it through the lens of French impressionist painter Edward Degas.
“Art is not what you see, but what you make others see,” Degas once said.
And as exposed by Owens, Demos and Ricciardi made others see Avery in as sympathetic a light as possible and the justice system the polar opposite way.
In a recent interview with Owens, Daily Wire editor emeritus Ben Shapiro asked, “In your series ‘Convicting A Murderer’… there’s a lot in there that people just don’t know that was directly overlooked or actually doctored…Can you give us just a taste of sort of the stuff that either wasn’t presented to the public in ‘Making a Murderer’ or was actively changed?”
Owens responded, “So I think one of the things that they were really brilliant at, these documentary makers, was deceptive editing.”
Owens continued, “If they’re showing you parts of the court testimony, you’re thinking that you’re watching a person respond…There’s a moment where they’re sitting in the courtroom, and the police officer gets asked a question, and they show you that he gets sort of tight and it looks like he’s lying. Right, so you have all these commentators like, ‘Well you see his reaction when he was asked that question.’ Well, in reality, that wasn’t even his response to that particular question. They just used him sitting up at a different moment and put it next to a question that he was asked at a different time.”
Owens went on to explain that “these deceptive editing tricks” are used to “heavily suggest that people were either innocent or people were guilty.”
The best-selling author added that the most fascinating parts of this documentary will be found by those viewers who are willing to “have the humility to explore how perhaps they were duped.”
To that extent, perhaps a little dose of “humility” is exactly what Demos and Ricciardi initially needed when originally criticized for leaving certain parts out of the documentary.
In one January 2016 interview, Ricciardi defended her “art” against accusations of selective editing from government officials as well as critics.
“I don’t really know how anyone is in a position to judge our process,” Ricciardi said. “We spent 10 years, collectively 20 years making this documentary. I guarantee you we read all of the primary course materials we could get our hands on, for a multitude of matters…so just because the prosecutor now comes forward after declining several interview requests by us and attacks us, and understands the power of accusation, doesn’t mean there is any veracity to what he is saying or that anyone should give any weight to what he is saying.”
But perhaps, that protestation was a sign of a blind arrogance to their own biases — not necessarily a confident defense of their documentary.
Indeed, in that same interview, the two filmmakers told the host that they were “open-minded when we started, and if anything, we are even more open-minded now” about what exactly happened in Avery’s case and whether the justice system was working the way it should have.
Yet roughly a week later, the two told TV host Stephen Colbert their true feelings about the case.
“My personal opinion is the state did not meet its burden in Steven or Brendan’s case,” Ricciardi said, before saying she believes he is “not guilty.”
Demos then agreed with her, while adding, “Is he guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? Nothing I have seen, and I’ve seen a lot of stuff, nothing has convinced me of that.”
The pair’s statements directly contradict their claim that they walked away with an “open mind.” That right there calls into question their insistence that “Making a Murderer” is a fair and accurate presentation sans any personal opinions or ulterior motives.
Of course, the only way to find answers to such questions is by doing one’s own research. Don’t take this author’s word that “MAM” was deceptively edited; do your own research on the topic. It’s the only way to truly form your own conclusion and avoid being misled.
There’s no better place to start than watching “Convicting a Murderer,” premiering Friday, September 8, at 9:00 PM ET on X. Watch here.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP
© https://www.dailywire.com
