InterviewsMovie News

Doc Filmmakers Silent on Couric Edit **UPDATED

Remember the fallout from New York Times reporter Jayson Blair’s fictionalized articles? Or the pall Dan Rather’s egregious error on George W. Bush’s military service cast on broadcast journalism?

So news that Katie Couric’s “Under the Gun” film maliciously edited material to bend the truth could impact documentary storytelling. Only so far there aren’t many documentary filmmakers voicing outrage over the incident.

Here’s the story:

Under the Gun: Official Trailer I EPIX

Couric’s film examines gun violence in America following high-profile mass shootings like the 2012 massacre at Newtown, Conn.. That attack killed 26 people, including 20 children. The film recently worked the the film festival circuit. Earlier this month, the movie aired on Epix.

Gun rights groups weren’t pleased with the presentation. They claimed the film leaned heavily toward the gun control side of the public debate. The press suggested the movie offered a balanced look at the issue.

The film is hardly the first documentary to divide audiences.

RELATED: Schumer’s Gun Sketch Fails Fact Check

The conversation changed this week when we learned some of the people Couric interviewed on camera taped their conversation to ensure nothing was taken out of context or manipulated.

They were right to be suspicious.

In the film, Couric asks members of Virginia Citizens Defense League, a pro-Second Amendment group, about background checks to prevent felons or terrorists from getting guns.

Roughly eight-plus seconds elapse. The League members are silent. They have no response. And then the narrative moves on to other issues. Here’s the moment in question:

Except that’s not what happened.

Turns out the League members did answer Couric’s question, and a robust exchange ensued. That didn’t make it into the film, though. The editors sliced and diced the footage enough to create an entirely different impression, one that painted the gun rights advocates in a negative light.

So what do documentary filmmakers think of how Couric and co. behaved? reached out to a number of filmmakers for comment. Most ignored the request. One filmmaker was traveling and couldn’t be reached.

The sole response came from Emmy-nominated Dan McComb, a Seattle-based documentary filmmaker.

“In my experience, “deceptively edited” is the term used by people to describe any
film that arrives at a different viewpoint than their own,” McComb wrote via e-mail.

HiT also reached out repeatedly to the International Documentary Association, which according to its web site, “is dedicated to building and serving the needs of a thriving documentary culture.”

Simon Kilmurry, IDA’s Executive Director, eventually sent this message:

“I can’t comment on the film since IDA doesn’t have editorial input into projects and I haven’t seen the film.”

For the record, both Couric and Epix still stand by their film and have not apologized for the malicious editing.

“Under the Gun” director Stephanie Soechtig sent a statement to The Washington Post regarding the editing: “I never intended to make anyone look bad and I apologize if anyone felt that way.”

Below are two recent tweets from Soechtig’s social media account:

UPDATE: Will Zavala, a Pittsburgh-based documentary filmmaker, sent HiT his thoughts on May 30:

I am in full agreement with the critics of this documentary filmmaker, based
on what I saw and listened to. That kind of manipulation does more than just
“embarrass” the subjects; it misrepresents them, and throws the credibility of the
whole documentary in question. A filmmaker/editor has every right to pick and
choose material, but has no ethical right to distort the words of people in a film.

It is quite possible that the documentary makes, in toto, a compelling argument
for gun control; I personally believe in such an argument. But I won’t be spending
my time watching this film.

Editing can be fun. It’s amazing what kind of “movie magic” you can make with
creative editing. A film about something important like this is not the place to have

photo credit: Gun Play via photopin (license)


  1. Are all documentaries this dishonest? If so, I need to take a a much more skeptical view when I watch them…

  2. “…some of the people Couric interviewed on camera taped their conversation
    to ensure nothing was taken out of context or manipulated.”

    Did I miss it? Did you post the unedited version of the taped conversation?

      1. Thanks. It’s about a 4 min answer. Two people answer directly and one gives a more general answer.

  3. Refusing to admit wrong-doing even in this all too obvious case demonstrates what most of us have long suspected. Virtually all the mainstream ‘make a documentary’ clique lacks integrity. They have no problem with Couric lying because they lie.

  4. I don’t think anybody expected an even-handed documentary on the subject to be showing on PBS a couple days after the President announces a new push for gun control. (Or ever.) It was a pre-arranged hit job.

  5. Kouric has established herself firmly as as the queen of airhead blond lying journalists. Yahoo should be proud.

  6. Soechtig was a co-producer on the notorious anti-science documentary GMO OMG!, which was panned even by left-leaning critics.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Back to top button