#31: Peter Kelly - The Thin Line Between Truth and the Appearance of Truth

Can you ever exploit the truth to be untruthful?

Why is authenticity always in your own self-interest?

How can we trust ourselves living in a deceptive world?

These and other fascinating questions are addressed when video virtuoso Peter Kelly joins The Rabbi and the Shrink.

http://www.peterkellymedia.com/

https://www.linkedin.com/in/peterwkelly/

1:30 Everything you’ve seen slanted by the bias of its source

You can be 100% accurate in your facts but also not truthful

The Giver -- the movie was designed to transcend politics

Context is critical to perception, irrespective of facts

What am I trying to accomplish?  The answer will guide us in our decision making

6:00 The world is not binary black and white, and ethics requires us to grapple with the gray

Authenticity requires us to represent both sides

Technology makes it easy to misrepresent without outright lying

9:00 Video allows us to fashion our virtual environment

What happens when we change our persona when we’re on camera?

Authenticity is self-serving

Virtual backgrounds?

13:00 Movies use illusion and deception to create an image of reality

The whole story is often overly detailed -- can we preserve the truth by editing the truth?

Expectations may require us to be fake to avoid the appearance of being fake

17:30  How will deep fake technology erode our confidence and trust in what we see?

22:30 Is the perception of polarization making us more polarized?

Don’t we have a responsibility to question sources, especially when they confirm our preconceptions?

What happens when the media don’t recognize their own responsibility to tell the truth?

It’s okay to say “I don’t know”

28:00  What can we do to check our own biases?

Media literacy:  Awareness of camera angle reveals bias

32:00 When is it ethical to use tricks to promote our image or agenda?

If it feels inauthentic, it probably is

Make sure soundbites accurately represent the whole story 

Overstating your case discredits your own cause

35:00  If I have to misrepresent my case or the opposing case, what does that say about my confidence in my own cause

Present the other side in the strongest way, then refute with an even stronger argument

How can we meet a public health crisis like COVID if we don’t debate them honestly?

All extremism comes from insecurity

41:00  We become emotionally invested in our preconceptions, even when we see them disproven

Listen to the other side before responding or attacking

The epidemic of ultracrepidarianism

Integrity of titles, sources, and statistics

53:00 The word of the day:  Verisimilitude

the appearance or semblance of truth; likelihood; probability

It’s not enough to “tell the truth” if we present it in a way that isn’t truthful

Do we have honest, collective commitment to the truth, or are we exploiting biases to serve ourselves or our agendas?

One of the best ways to preserve mental health is talking to people you disagree with

57:00  Have faith in yourself to pursue the truth

Have objective contacts who will be honest with you and use them to check yourself and your integrity

Transcript

Margarita Gurri: 0:03

Don't you just love the smell of ethics in the morning? I know I do. Welcome to the rabbi in the string. This is Dr. Margarita Gurri. Your host, Dr. Redshoe and this is my co host,

Yonason Goldson: 0:16

Yonason Goldson

Margarita Gurri: 0:18

The rabbi and I are very blessed today to have our video producer and post production guru, Peter Kelly, welcome Peter Kelly. Thanks for having me. You know, nowadays in this world of video and the rabbi and I've had many discussions about some of our colleagues choices and people in the world, it's getting complicated because it used to be video was something that you, you that only professionals do, and I have a bunch of people doing, anyone with a video camera can do it, anyone who can kind of figure out how to edit, edit. And I think sometimes that creates some interesting, and not so interesting results. So tell us Peter Kelly, you've been a producer for 10 years and editor, video editor for 20. You've done documentaries, including Ink, alter egos exposed, you've done all sorts of video, fish heads and context. Tell us what you think we need to know about video editing, and ethics.

Peter Kelly: 1:25

Oh, man, it's so many. It's such a big topic. It is, as a viewer, you need to be aware that everything you're seeing is a series of choices. So I know I've had people send me videos from sources that are not reputable, and I'll refuse to watch them. And they'll say it doesn't hurt you to watch a video and it can you need to be aware of who's made the video and what their biases. And everybody's got one like I know when I make a video, I've got my own bias. And I try to remove myself but I'm a human being. So you need to be aware, though, as a viewer is who's made a video? What was their intent? And then if you're the one making the video, there's a series of questions you kind of have to ask yourself, not least of which is and is what I'm putting out into the world. Real? Is it authentic? Because it's very easy to twist the facts and twist the truth. And you can actually show stuff that is 100% accurate, but presented in a way that leads to an untruth a miss truth, as it were.

Yonason Goldson: 2:38

Now that's really fascinating, Peter, because what you're essentially doing is you're telling a story with the facts. And you just reminded me as you were speaking that one of the one of the really most remarkable books I've read children's book, the giver. Just a brilliant, brilliant book. And when it was made into a movie, the the 200, producers, directors, the collaborators who were behind it was politically conservative, almost politically liberal. And they decided to collaborate because it's a story that could easily be politicized. Right, and they wanted it not to be. And they got stars also, as Jeff Bridges is conservative, and Meryl Streep was liberal. And they made a tremendous conscious effort to keep their own personal politics out of it. What are some of the strategies that you use? You mentioned you try to keep a check on your natural bias, how do you what do you do to try to be objective?

Peter Kelly: 3:37

It's very situational. But so you kind of have to just kind of assess what's, what's the project need, the project need has to supersede my personal need. And I'll give not I won't get into the weeds of it. But I worked for a news magazine show for a couple years. And I would we were pumping out content very quickly. So I had to throw at it something together even like Wednesday morning, and it would go to air Wednesday evening. And there was a couple of clips of the, say, a controversial President of the United States. And I had the opportunity. It was within my control. I could leave in a clip long, you know, show the full 15 seconds, and he's not going to come off looking good. Or I can show five seconds and he'll look fine. And I have my bias about the about the that person. But the needs of the project were I was relaying facts. And he was part of the story. And I'm like, I just need to relay the facts. And in this case, my job really as an editor is to make people look good. So I kind of just went on that I'm like, Okay, I'm not going to change anything, but I'll present it so this person who I disagree with, looks good. Because that's what the piece needed. That makes sense. So it's, it's one of those I'm constantly wrestling because I also aware that I've now presented him in a good light to viewers, who am I reinforcing their belief? Or am I changing their belief on this person? It's very easy to, to put together a montage of somebody who's incredibly articulate, but make them sound like an idiot. It's very simple to do.

Yonason Goldson: 5:27

It's everywhere you stay, there's you removed some of the context. And by removing the context, you're in, you change the perception. But in the larger context of your objective, it may have been entirely appropriate to do that, which is really knotty kind of a question.

Peter Kelly: 5:47

So it comes down to like, if I'm the editor, and there's a producer, especially for a new show, I'll have the conversation with the producer. It's like, Hey, what are we doing here? Who's the audience? What are we actually trying to tell. And then within that framework, that's where you make the decisions. You know, if we're trying to highlight a tragedy, as so often happens in news, then you're going to focus on on the tragedy itself, and the people affected, not any one individual, that's not a time to make it look like this, I did this or this, I did that. And really, a lot of it comes down to the world. People treat everything like it's binary, it's black, it's white, it's left to right. You know, politically, I'm not even American. And I know, America seems to be split into two political parties right now. You're either one or the other, there's no in between. So you have to be aware that that's not the way the world works, and don't present video that feeds into that binary choice.

Yonason Goldson: 6:51

You know, what we're certainly with you on that. And we talk a lot here about grappling with gray. Because most of life does exist in those gray areas. And it's comforting to us to make everything black and white. Yeah, because then we have less thinking to do we have easier choices to make. But we end up doing ourselves individually and collectively a tremendous disservice. And and you see it in the news, and you see it in movies, and you see it in, in all kinds of video and in media. And so the the authenticity of trying to represent both sides. Yeah. Yeah, I can see this. I mean, it's a challenge in our personal lives. But all the more so when you're when you're creating images that you want to be truthful. Yeah.

Peter Kelly: 7:45

So the documentary, it's a it's a hard field to be in right now. Because of, it's so easy to make somebody look one way or be aware of it. My favorite documentary, there was a series pardon my French, but the title of it was called bullshit. And one of the things I liked about it as a viewer was, they would show you the edit points in a conversation. Normally, when you put when I put together like a documentary, if I'm, if I was talking about video, I would, I could potentially splice up my conversation, and then cover it with shots of whatever I'm talking about. So if I'm talking about Marvel movies, you'd see clips of Marvel movies. And the audio underneath is going to be bits and pieces of different sentences, you know, from the same interview. And one of the things I liked about that TV show was they showed you the person talking, and you could see where they made the edits. So you could see where they had removed parts of their sentence to make the point. So it was very transparent. They also played it for comedic effect, which helped. But it ethically It was like, you could see the bias of the of the filmmakers, as you were watching, and they were unapologetic about it.

Margarita Gurri: 8:59

Well, I like that Well, the rabbi and I've been talking about video. And let's start with the basic question with everyday use of video in zoom meetings or whatever. What are some of the ethical dilemmas you have noted with just the use of everyday video?

Peter Kelly: 9:18

I it it's it's an authenticity issue, to be perfectly honest people. You have to walk that balance between you want to present yourself a certain way, but you don't want to misrepresent like a case in point. I have a background set up. And it's a very calculated background. So when I'm in a business meeting, you can very clearly see there's a video camera right and that's a subconscious thing. I want people to think of video think of me what you don't see just off frame is my office is actually a bit of a mess at the moment. And you know, there's I can explain why but it's irrelevant. But for me, every time I have a zoom meeting, I make sure that my mess is not on camera, and I look like I'm in a pristine environment. I'm okay with that. Because if I were to have somebody in my space, I would do a proper clean. So I think my background represents what I'm actually like. But I'm also aware that I'm making a choice. And so when you're doing video like that, your choice of words becomes a big thing, I find a lot of people less so now because zoom, and video conferencing became such a main thing and everyday thing for for people because of the pandemic. But video was scary to people. So they would always try to put on their best face, and sound smart. And any and you could always tell when someone was trying to sound smart, because they would be using words that they would never use. You know, like, like, I would never say who absconded my Chesterfield. But I would say who stole my couch? Right. But the who stole my couch seems a little rough and tumble with no hoop slanted, my Chesterfield seems a little prim and proper. And you'll see that with people, people will change how they talk and how they behave on camera. And, and I think, I think you're doing a disservice to yourself if you do that. Because you know, even on a business meeting, be authentic. Because if you have to put on airs, or you have to put, you have to create a character, that's a character you're going to have to maintain. Whenever you interact with that person, which so much easier if you find a way to be yourself, find a way to be comfortable. And just, I'm Peter Kelly, this is what I'm like, if you talk to me on zoom, this is what I'm like you talk to me in person, it's a lot less work for me. And it also means that business wise, I attract people that like who I am. And if you saw me and you know, you saw one of my videos that I post on LinkedIn where I'm talking like this, and you don't like me, I'm okay with that. Because that means you're not going to try to interact with me. And we've just saved ourselves a whole lot of hassle. So there, there's something like, ethically, you shouldn't misrepresent yourself, but it's also self serving, right? Like, it just saves me a lot of time. If I'm just myself, I only attract people who like, who Peter Kelly is.

Margarita Gurri: 12:22

So what are the issues that started happening and the revenue and I've talked about this is the backgrounds. And so we've seen different people in video on a yacht, and it's not their yacht, I mean, they're in a closet, and they have a yacht behind them. Those kinds of things. I think that it can be done with a sense of humor and a sense of joy and, or it could be done in a real fakey fake. I'm pretending to be in Paris, when really I'm in, you know, Topeka, Kansas, things like that, is with a rabbi. And I've talked about that being something we're not comfortable with, which is interesting. Rabbi, you had something to say.

Yonason Goldson: 13:03

What did I have to say?

Margarita Gurri: 13:07

That's okay, we can edit this part out, engaging a doctor and just

Yonason Goldson: 13:13

I forget everything else. We were, you know, to take the point just a little bit further. We, I think about times, I've seen documentaries of house how movies were made. And they show you the whole set. And you hear the sound effects they're using. And it's cringe worthy. You think, my gosh, how could that anybody ever watch this, and then when they show it to you the way it appears in the movie, it's the camera angle. And the whatever tricks they use with the audio, it creates a compelling, real experience that draws you into the story. Yeah, and so, you know, we have this this issue when it comes to to professional speaking. If I tell a story of my life, that has a message that I want people to, to find value in. I have to edit that story. I can't put in all the details because they're not all relevant. Right? I can't always keep to the pure chronological sequence, because sometimes that can take people into the weeds and create confusion. So I have to balance How do I present this story truthfully and authentically, in a way that serves my audience. And again, you you you hear stories of people who missed represent, and over embellish, and play games with the truth. And there's this temptation to, but the truth isn't always good enough, we were talking off camera about, you know, these, these movies that are based on true events are inspired by true events. And then when you hear what actually happens, you feel a little bit cheated. That the story they told me was true, is really has lots of false hood woven into it.

Peter Kelly: 15:35

Yeah, the inspired by is the might, it's funny growing up my father. He's a contractor, but he likes to tell stories. He's like one of those guys. He'd never get in front of a camera, not for a million dollars. But he could have people sitting around the table. And he'll he'll keep them engaged for an hour telling stories. And he used to always tell me Never let the truth get in the way of a good story. And when when you're telling anecdotes, that's fine. When you're producing mass media, you have to be careful, and actually reminded me of another point, sometimes people will do stuff, and it has the unintended effect. Like what? Let me ask you this question, what noise does a frog make that classic ribbit sound that we all know, most frogs don't make that noise. The frog that makes that noise is in Southern California, where Hollywood is so so it wasn't a deliberate misleading of people. But at one point in time, a couple of sound recorders needed to have the sound of a frog. So they went out and found the closest frog to them, and recorded it making the ribbit noise. And then it gets used in a million movies. And it doesn't matter what kind of frog it is. Because as an editor, I'm not an expert in frogs. But I have a sound effect that's labeled frog and I have a video that the picture of a frog. So you put the two together, and I'm being completely honest. But now the whole world thinks frogs make this noise that only frogs in Southern California make.

Yonason Goldson: 17:14

But if you went out and found the actual noise of the actual frog you're using, you could end up confusing your audience because they're expecting the frog to sound a certain way.

Peter Kelly: 17:24

I've taken out some some things because they didn't like this is what actually happened. But it looks like it's fake. And that is an actual issue I've had to grapple with professionally for TV. It's It's a crazy thing. That the thing that the reality looks fake, so I have to fake something. So it seems real. Well,

Margarita Gurri: 17:43

sometimes we have to put a fake unicorn on a real unicorn, you know, a unicorn horn on the you know, and they that from the last unicorn they talked about that just people don't always see what's really in front of them. So we have from Charlotte, have you covered fake videos where real people are getting facial movements by AI? And sound is cut from many different sources other than the California frog?

Peter Kelly: 18:09

Deep fake? We haven't touched on that yummy talking about that for a bit or do you? Yeah,

Margarita Gurri: 18:14

yeah, there's a great time. Okay, so great question.

Peter Kelly: 18:17

So there's technology now where you can if, especially in the day and age of podcasting, if somebody has a podcast out that's like more than 100 episodes, there's usually enough audio clips of them talking that you could if you have the right program makes them say anything, because you have all of the noises that they naturally make. You just mix up the order in which they make it all of a sudden, his words are just noises, right? So. So deep fake is that the name that's been given to the technology where people can superimpose a big thing is to do clips from movies. I've seen a scene of Back to the Future, which in actual fact, has Michael J. Fox and Christopher Lloyd, but they've replaced it with Tom Holland and Robert Downey Jr. and it, it looks incredible, but it's like you've completely replaced the actors in the movie. And, and that's going to be a growing trend. And and what really, like I say scary, because it's not scary. But what, what the impact of it is, is that technology is open to almost anyone. Um, Jason point there was a Justice League movie a couple years ago. And Superman was one of the characters played by Henry Cavill. And they had to do some reshoots for the movie. So they filmed the movie they edited, they had to go back and they just had to film a couple more scenes. And Henry Cavill had gone off and made another movie, and he came back for a day or two, but he had this big mustache, and he couldn't shave it off to be Superman. He's like, I can't shave off the mustache for two days because I had to go back to the movie where I have a mustache. So they digitally removed his mustache in the movie. Somebody's at home. So this is a big blockbuster film. You know, it's got the entire, there'll be a CGI department working on this. Somebody at home did a better job. They were so appalled by how bad the effects were removing the mustache, that he just sat at home with his own computer and spent a few days and he fixed it. And he made it look better than a Hollywood feature film. It was like, it was completely innocent because it was for a fictional piece. But if he can, if he can do that, for Justice League and Superman, what's to say he can't do that for the mayor, or the governor or you know, you can you can put words in people's mouths you can you can change what they look like. And it's going to have to become a cultural thing. Where a we learn to recognize it but be also we teach people that the the choice to do that shouldn't be when you consider I believe, you know, you shouldn't be putting words in other people's mouth. And we're just kind of

Margarita Gurri: 21:01

Arnold Schwarzenegger movie quite some time ago, where the news people didn't have enough good news. So they redid the footage to make him look like he slaughtered people's I forget who it is. But, but it showed the ridiculousness that people could go to for ratings or whatever, and how authentic it looks to remaster stuff. You know, it's it's a little scary, isn't it?

Peter Kelly: 21:28

Yeah. Jordan Peele is a filmmaker. Now. If you Google, Jordan, Peele Obama, he made a video, let me say two years ago, that Jordan Peele does a really good impersonation of brock obama. So he recorded a whole bunch of audio, and then they had the video of, of Obama. And it's, and he, they did it purely to draw attention to the fact that this stuff can be faked. So it was done ethically. And you see the footage, and you see Jordan Peele, side by side with the footage of Obama. So you can see what's happening. But it's remarkable how how well he, they were able to make it look like the president united states at the time could say anything.

Yonason Goldson: 22:12

And I find this profoundly scary, because we're already living in an age where people are so skeptical, and so cynical, and fake news. And, you know, what do people do? And people typically go to the news outlets that tell them what they've already decided. They believe. And I mean, I wrote an article on this a few weeks ago, about the g7 conference, or as a ga camera, they there were three different headlines on the same story from three mainstream news outlets. That all sounded like they'd been on different continents, instead of reporting on the same event. And, you know, how are we you know, you mentioned, what, what really is obvious to us in America is that we are profoundly polarized. I think that the perception of polarization is much worse than the reality. But that the perception is driving the reality and is polarizing us further. And they're just you what what, you know, there's a certain zealotry to these news organizations, we represent the truth, we have a responsibility to get people to think the way we've decided they need to think, and therefore the ends justify the means. And that we answer, it's like somebody said, once you learn to fake authenticity, then you've got it made. Yeah, yeah.

Peter Kelly: 23:43

It goes down to Yeah, people need to be become media literate. And and you need to do the research and understand the bias that that each, if a corporation, each corporation is going to tell you something and why are they telling you it? Yeah. And whether you agree with it, especially if you agree with it, you should be looking into the source. As a non American, I get a lot of American news, it comes across the border. But it's really interesting, too, because I see a lot of Canadian news and a lot of British news as well. And I don't think a lot of people in the states get that very varied opinions. So I always encourage people, like look into a sources of news from outside of your country. If they if you see what they're they do, because they have a lot less skin in the game. You know, the British reporting on something happening in United States. They don't they don't have anything to gain. So odds are you're getting a more objective point of view from them. Not always, but look into it. There's one of the bigger news organizations in the States. If you look into it, they've argued in court several times, that they don't have an obligation to tell the truth. And that's the sort of thing That, okay, I've learned that I don't I don't consume anything from that company at all anymore. There's no upside whether I agree with it, whether I disagree with that is irrelevant. If at their core, they don't believe they have an obligation to tell the truth. I'm not interested in watching that.

Margarita Gurri: 25:15

That's right. And that and I looked up the name, it was the running man with Arnold Schwarzenegger. And I think that see, as a kid coming from Cuba, the communist country, we saw on the news and heard on the radio, all sorts of stories, which I knew were not true. Now, I don't know if the reporters knew wasn't true. I don't know if they were editing, or hearing what they would wish. Even people with certain heroes that are actually murderers? Do they really not know that person? Like, I see this T shirt all the time and iconic t shirt with a murder? And I'm thinking, do they not know that this person was this horrific? Figure? And the issue is the fake stuff? How do we really know? So let's say I'm going to listen to Canadian news or news from England and news from Germany or whatever? How does anyone know what's real or not? I mean, and and if we're doing research by researching different companies, so people ask me all the time about what's happening in Cuba, and I'm gonna say, I haven't been properly briefed. I don't know what's really happening. I see what I'm seeing. I hear what I'm hearing. I read what I'm reading, I don't know. Because I know as a kid, what they were saying I knew for a fact was not real.

Peter Kelly: 26:31

kudos for you for saying that. I'm finding it's, it's amazing how many people won't say, I don't know. I know, what's your opinion on this? And they'll just start talking. And it's okay to say, I don't know. Yeah.

Yonason Goldson: 26:44

And I mean, that's, that's really wisdom. Yeah, it's a sign of wisdom there in the Oh, the late night shows, sometimes we'll go out and interview people. And one of the one of my favorite ones is when they ask people number of years ago, which do you support? The Affordable Care Act or Obamacare? Well, of course, they're the same thing. But most of the people who didn't know that, and nobody said, Gee, I don't know the difference, or what's this? Or what's that. And, you know, the DI D talks about Cuba. I'm very sensitive to news about Israel. And that's been Israel for nine years. I lived there during the first Gulf War. And while it was bad, you know, Scud missiles falling on Tel Aviv. My parents were absolutely horrified in the States by what sounded like, you know, Hezbollah in Lebanon. It was it. There's no comparison we were going about our lives. Right. Right. But the news media made it sound and the you were talking about bias. A number of years ago, I remember reading I think it was andrew sullivan reported on this to the New York Times had issued a series of errors about reporting on Israel. There were nine area of error errors in us in a short period of time, eight of which favored the other side, were anti Israel. So if they're innocent errors, you should find this more or less 50. If you continue to make your errors favoring one side or the other, then clearly you need to re examine your own bias. Yeah,

Margarita Gurri: 28:26

yeah, those are the biases. So what is what we need to do as human beings, let's say with our everyday day use of video whether to present ourselves to connect with our audiences to connect with clients in our business, or even to inform ourselves about the world. What do you suggest we do? Peter Kelly,

Peter Kelly: 28:48

big question. media literacy is a big thing, being aware, even how people choose to film something can can affect it. Like I do a bit of training for some clients about how to have effective zoom calls. And one of the things I'll talk about is camera angles. Because where you place the camera sends a certain kind of message. So if you have the camera low, so it's pointing high. That that's a position of dominance. It's in the most extreme example, if you're to watch a horror movie, they filmed the monster and the cameras always low pointing up, because then it's more menacing. I'm in a Marvel film, they'll do that with the villain. And they'll actually do the opposite for the hero like in Captain America movie, you'll see watch it, there's a couple of shots in pretty much every sequence where they've taken the camera and it's not extreme, they'll put it like an eye level and then raise it up a little bit and tilt it down. So Captain America at the beginning of the movie, subconsciously, is a little bit weaker than the villain who's filmed the other way. And then at the end of the movie, they flip it so Captain America's film Low, so he's more powerful. And he's now overcome the villain, and he wins. So being aware of just the placement of the camera can tell you a lot about, about the the footage that you're watching. If they've put the camera low, and it's just an interview, they're trying to make that person seem like an authority, like they're an expert, like they're in control, if they're filming, so they're low is pointing down, if they're trying to make that person look weaker, and it tends to be a subconscious thing. But it is a real thing. Trust me, there's an entire feature films like they will discuss at length in pre production, what angle to put the camera, I'm actually doing like an art film next week for a client. And we're discussing that this week, you know, what's the payment, what's the mood we're trying to go for. And again, it's very subconscious, but it's a very real

Yonason Goldson: 30:58

phenomenon. This is this is not a new phenomenon, and you go back a couple 100 years to where they used to paint kings on horseback. And if you look at many of those paintings, you'll see the head the horse's head is undersized. Right gang look bigger. And they want to present that sense of majesty.

Margarita Gurri: 31:20

Well, like in Jaws, they had this huge fake shark. And so they used a very small cage with a man who have very small stature to make the shark that they had created look bigger, right? So it's about scale. Charlotte said something we're hardwired and socially conditioned to believe our eyes, and deep fake will do people responding to the deep fake stuff. But I think it's relevant to what we're talking about now. So what is ethical? Let's say we want our cells to look better. We want to look powerful, with our super capes on or off. We want to connect with our audiences. Where are we within ethical recommendations to shine in the world of video?

Peter Kelly: 32:09

The single biggest thing is don't misrepresent or don't. If something, if you're doing something and it feels inauthentic. you've, you've probably crossed the line. If you feel like you're faking something, then you are It's one thing for me to put my camera a little bit low, because I want to look good, or you know, selfies, it tends to be high angle. That's more flattering. So that's one thing. But it's another to be aware of how much you're actually faking like, Am I am I buying a three piece suit that I only wear when I'm on camera. Now that's not how I dress day to day, that's one of those gray areas. It's nobody's getting hurt. But that's, that's not authentic. So it's a matter of being aware of that. And the other thing would be if you're ever using footage of somebody else, you have to make sure you're not changing the intent of what they were talking about. It's important if you have an obligation, I will often condense what somebody has said, to make it fit into a piece, you know, they may have talked about something for 15 minutes, and I only have 30 seconds to put it in, I'll make sure what gets put in represents that person's point of view to the best of my ability. You never you never it's easy to make it seem like it's the opposite. Or they were talking about this. Before we started filming. I read about an interview 2020 had done with a wrestler called Mick Foley, and they showed him a clip and got him to respond to it. And then they showed him a second clip and got him to respond to that. And the second clip was incredibly violent. And then when the piece went to air, they showed the second clip, which showed his response to the first one. So he wasn't responding to the violence. And it seemed it made him seem like not a big deal. And it was completely unethical. Right. It was just one of those like you he they misrepresented what he had to say. So that's the sort of thing if you're dealing with other people's footage, just even if you disagree with it, you're obligated to to make sure their intent hasn't changed.

Yonason Goldson: 34:26

Yeah, that's the point that we mentioned before we started recording and then the doctor and I have sometimes different views on this is how much credit to give people for rationalization that starts with good intentions. Right? Yeah. Versus people who are simply salacious. They just want to advance their agenda. They just want to make a quick buck. You know, there's a fella named Michael Shellenberger. I think he's one of the big big advocates in about global warming and climate change. And and he says The people who do the most damage to the climate change movement are climate change advocates, who misrepresent and overstate their facts, and thereby discredit the entire movement. So, do you have any insights getting into the heads inside the heads of people who do what you just described, consciously changing an interview to make somebody look bad?

Peter Kelly: 35:24

Yeah, that's, that's a common thing. I firmly believe that when somebody has their point of view or their their side of an argument, but they don't have a strong case, that's when they do that. And my argument to that is, if, if I have to make the other side look bad, to make my point of view look good, then that says a lot about my faith, in my point of view. So if you see something that looks incredibly unbalanced, ask yourself why what what has what case has the person who's looking good actually put forth. And I might my personality thing is, it's not even ethical. It's just a personal point of pride. Anybody can be smarter than an idiot. So if I make if I make you who disagree with me look like an idiot. So what if I make your case look incredibly compelling, and then put forth an even better argument from my side, I mean, that's the best of both worlds because A, it's balanced. And then B, the viewer gets to see both sides, the strong points of both sides of point of view, and then my biased, I'm not so worried about it, because I tend to come to things with this is what I think. But if I presented the other side in the best possible light, and I still think my side comes out ahead. That says a lot about my faith in my point of view,

Margarita Gurri: 36:57

right? And it says a lot about your point of view. And the rabbi and I talking about that quite a bit, that one of the things we're hoping this podcast promotes is people being able to listen and express not only their own point of view and the reasons for it, but their understanding their correct understanding of other people's point of view, and where they get data for that. Yes, I think if you can state both ends of something, then maybe you have a chance of moving to people's hearts and minds, to your point of view, if it's thoughtfully and ethically constructed argument.

Yonason Goldson: 37:35

And what's the worst thing that could happen? Maybe I'll discover that there actually is some legitimacy to the other side. Yes, yeah.

Margarita Gurri: 37:43

Almost always some legitimacy to legitimacy to the other side. I mean, you'd have to mean, the world is full of options.

Peter Kelly: 37:51

I'm a big believer, if you're talking to a functioning adult, and they disagree with you, there has to be a rationale,

Margarita Gurri: 37:58

define functioning. Yes, that's why I'm laughing.

Peter Kelly: 38:02

But no, but truly, it's like, it's really easy online to go on, and have a conversation with somebody who you disagree with, and like they're an idiot. But the reality is, if they've got a job, you know, they've made it 30 4050 years on the planet Earth and our, you know, part of society. They're different disagreement came from somewhere, like their point of view didn't come out of a lifetime of being wrong. So where did that point of view come from? Why Why is my experience lead me a certain way? When someone else's experience leads them the complete opposite? There's absolutely

Margarita Gurri: 38:38

in America right now, many of the arguments that are in the forefront of everyone's mind is there are more and more new requirements for universities, for government, different businesses, to require not only the wearing of masks again, but to be vaccinated for returning college students for re for people who work at this facility or that, and I, when I'm shocked by and saddened by is the emotionality of the arguments rather than facts. Yep. Beyond WHICH ARE WE DO WE ARE WE justified in in saying someone must be vaccinated? That's one issue, that ethical arguments to be had, there's opinions to be had, let's explore those. And then there's also who could be an exception to that, for whom is a vaccine, an unwise and unhealthy choice? I don't see people making those discussions. Rather, it's all good or all bad. or forget if it's dangerous or required or not, you can't make me Well, I remember saying that when I was five years old, you can't make me. Well, you're not the boss of me. Well, you know, no. We are the boss of our own selves now. So if I don't want to work in a place that's Find your vaccine. I think before I make any dramatic emotional decisions, wouldn't it behoove us to look at the facts?

Peter Kelly: 40:10

Everything based on on data and data and science I'm a big believer in, and sometimes you find out things that you didn't want to be true.

Yonason Goldson: 40:21

Yeah, yeah. But even within the scientific community, those you have certain conventions, that if you challenge those, you'll be condemned by your colleagues. So it's not safe to take certain scientific positions. Even if you do have facts on your side. You go, it goes back to what you're saying about that. That sense of of insecurity. It's one of my favorite quotes I used in my TED talk from Rabbi Joseph soloveitchik, who was one of the great rabbinic leaders of last generation. He said, All fanaticism and extremism comes from a lack of security. He said that I'm insecure. He said, a secure person cannot be an extremist. Because I'm not threatened. I've looked at both sides, I study the issues. I've made rational decisions. And I'm confident in the position that I hold. And then I love to quote my college professor who said, I don't understand people complain about being disillusioned. Why would I not want to be relieved of my illusions?

Peter Kelly: 41:27

Yeah, yeah. Well, it's funny, when, when I was in university, a song would be was very popular amongst my music crowd, like very, and it was called the sun song. And it was it's a very funny song, but it's how the sun works. And the band, the band, you know, that was 20 years ago, has since Come on, said all of the scientific principles that they were singing about in this happy go lucky song. Not all of them are correct. We've since learned that a lot of the things that we thought about the Sun 20 years ago, aren't true. And somebody in my group told me that and I was like, Oh, that's so sad. Because, you know, I had this emotional attachment to this song. And I remember him saying, Peter, this is good. This is how science works. We learn something new, and then we adjust. I was like, you're right. You're absolutely right. So

Yonason Goldson: 42:16

if we address the second most popular TED Talk ever is is about the US this fake it till you make it principle. And, and apparently on a on a psychological level. There's much truth in that. But in the talk, the speaker says that there are physiological effects to that, which apparently have been completely debunked. Oh, really. And yet, this remains an enormously popular talk. Because, you know, people like what Yeah, they like the message. And it's reassuring. But it does challenge truthfulness.

Peter Kelly: 43:01

Yeah, I would totally tap into the insecurity of, you know, fake, fake it till you make, it's really easy. I know, for me, there was a very conscious decision one day, when I was an assistant editor, that I would wear a tie. And the perception around me changed almost immediately, where I was seen as being older than I was more experienced than I was. And frankly, the amount of money I could charge per hour went up. So, so fake it till you make it, I can definitely see the appeal.

Margarita Gurri: 43:35

Well, and some of that is playing into the unconscious biases that people look a certain way and ask for a certain amount of money or worth it, right? Yeah. Well, let's talk about something that the rabbi and I bump into all the time, is we've all been criticized for noticing either a scientific principle or that a person wasn't quite right, something's off with that person that or an idea. And we've all spoken up, in contrast to the popular opinion, all of us that I don't think that person's right. I think maybe they're misusing power. I think they're, they've got something going on that is dangerous, or this scientific principle needs to be challenged, whatever it is that we're going against status quo. And the problem is, how do we move forward with facts calmly knowing both sides without having to always be ostracized or canceled? Right? Oh, yeah. And that goes in video if you're telling a video story. So how do you walk that line when someone is trying to talk about a changing physiological fact or scientific principle or understanding about a particular person or organization? What What is your word of wisdom? To proceed thoughtfully and effectively,

Peter Kelly: 45:02

um, the, the single biggest thing is to listen. Yes, if somebody is presenting something that doesn't conform to what you've been taught or what you know, just listen for a while. And it's amazing how I've suggested that and people get hostile. One person who, a friend of mine, actually, he was like, I will not be silenced. And I was like, nobody's asking you to be silenced. I'm asking you to listen, that's all it is. So I find that if you're never going to regret being quiet, and listening for a bit, because you might learn something. And this is really easy for me to say, first to admit, it's hard for me to put in practice, and argue with my wife last week, because she's like, you're not actually listening to me, you're just waiting for your turn to talk again. And she was right. But it's it's the listening and then understanding again, it goes back to your experience. I know like gender is a big thing right now. And a lot of people see gender as binary. And I've seen the argument before, they're like, well, there was only girls and boys when I was in high school. And my point there would be, but do you think your high school biology class was the end of biology? Like, do you think you've learned everything about because I, I haven't, I haven't done a single biology class in like, 23 years. So my knowledge of biology is not great. So if somebody is going to tell me that there's more than two genders, like, like, if you told me that 10 years ago, my mind would have been blown, like, What are you talking about? But there is data and science to support that. And I've done a little bit of reading into it, it doesn't really affect my life. So it's not no major topic for me. But I've done a little bit of reading into it. And it's like, this is far more complicated than I could have imagined. So I'm going to let people who are invested and experts in the field to talk about it.

Yonason Goldson: 47:05

Well, that's a really astute comment that we could all benefit from. We have a we have a word of the day, which is coming up. But the first episode that we recorded, the word of the day was ultra cryptid. area, which means to express opinions outside one's area of expertise. And this is becoming a an epidemic, or a panda. Everybody's sees himself sees yourself as an authority, because I heard somebody say it, I saw it on such and such news network. Even the people you heard it from what are their qualifications? Yeah, it's, it's easy for us. For us. For some of us. It's easy for the system to create experts. Yep. And and I mean, that goes also into documentary the people you're quoting the people you're citing, are you representing the different sides, honestly, and effectively,

Peter Kelly: 48:08

you're doing a little bit of research, I've heard multiple stories of a TV personality on an it was on a non new show for a network telling an anecdote, that anecdote being reported upon in a newspaper, and then the news wing of the show, that had the person that told the story originally reporting on the newspaper, and it looks like you've got three sources there. And it all came from one person and it was completely inaccurate. But yeah, yeah, the the expertise. It's very easy. I mean, in post production, all I need to do is put my name Peter Kelly, I'm gonna put video producer, but I could put biologist, how would you know, right? You have that title there. And then all of a sudden, I seem like I'm an authority. There's a reason why dentists commercials have the dentist in a lab coat. People in lab coats seem like they're experts. Right? Like, she's just an actress telling me to brush my teeth. But it She looks like a dentist to me.

Yonason Goldson: 49:18

Or one of my favorites in the old try to income commercially. Four out of five dentists recommend sugarless gum. Well, that's not that's not telling you to buy traded gum. That's and where did you even find one dentist out of five who said that you're you're not better off chewing sugar. Let's

Margarita Gurri: 49:36

go. Yeah, and the question is whether you should be chewing gum at all. But so what was the question of all of these horrible gums? Yeah, trying to hate the least or the most I mean, it's it's interesting how, how that goes. And how we present ourselves and in my, you know, I'm a psychologist. If we misrepresent our credentials, let's say you call me Goddess of the world. Well, that's not my credential. So I'll have to say I'm sorry, I'm not the goddess of the world, I am this. If I don't correct it, I could lose not only my reputation be censured by my licensing board, right? If I let people call me a clinical, a licensed clinical psychologist, where there's no such thing as a licensed clinical psychologist, just licensed psychologist, so we have to be careful with, you know, not everybody not I don't know, if you're allowed to say you're a biologist. if, if, if, you know, obviously, not, I mean, ethically not, but would you lose your license? Well, so sometimes there's teeth to something that if you do what you're not supposed to be doing ethically, you can get in trouble, and sometimes not. Either way, you lose your reputation.

Peter Kelly: 50:48

Yeah, I am a big fan of regulation. And you know, having having somebody Yeah, third party kind of verifying stuff, there's nothing wrong with that. It's just a matter of you know, it really, culturally though, I think we need to change how society a bit. So that way, people don't make that choice. Like it should be. I have very strong views on on billionaires, to be perfectly honest. I think that's people hoarding wealth. And my view is, I don't think we should make being a billionaire illegal. But I think we should, as a culture, make it so shameful that nobody would ever aspire to be a billionaire. So there's things like that, where, culturally I think we need to have these conversations and, and agree on where we want to go and why.

Yonason Goldson: 51:37

That's, you know, that's one of the reasons that we have this program, because it's a pluralistic society, we have a lot of different opinions. And it's, it's, it takes a tremendous amount of effort to find common ground to articulate common values and to work together to, to strengthen those values, because it's so much easier to just sling mud and attack and withdraw into our little ideological enclaves and declare that everybody else is either misguided, deluded, or wicked.

Margarita Gurri: 52:16

And then we only invite those kinds of people that agree with us into our world. I know I've gotten into trouble with with at least one friend with our discussions about getting vaccinated. And I've been pleased that my friends at least don't become nasty. Interest my all my true friends have gotten vaccinated along with me, but the discussion with some others who don't believe in it, they actually think that they're being lied to and that the facts aren't real. And it's if they have real reasons why they're not doing it. I I it's fascinating though. I love arguing with people who are reasonable. And you come out you learn a lot. You can and I'm, I'm trying to learn and I'm trying to listen, it's fascinating. So speaking of listening, and fascinating Rabbi Dylan, I think it's time for the word of the day, sir.

Yonason Goldson: 53:17

Well, word of the day is chosen, especially for this episode. And for our guest, Peter, the word is verisimilitude. verisimilitude is the appearance or a semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability. And it's very much what we're talking about. When I want to present a story. Whether it's a fictional story with a with a true theme, or a documentary story that is trying to show the whole picture. just telling the truth does not always appeared to be truthful. And the appearance of truthfulness can sometimes be used to deceive and to disguise a lack of truth. So once again, we're in this gray area, where we have to balance our commitment to the truth with the presentation of the truth that ultimately serves the truth. And it's so much of it comes down to intention. Peter, you said earlier, you know we as a society, we need to come to an honest, collective commitment. But not everyone in society wants that. And that's part of the challenge, especially when so much of it is commercialized, you make more money. When you drive people to extreme points of view, the algorithms are set up that way. And so we're not just competing against our own personal bias. We're competing against a culture that in many ways is set up to be untruthful. And we have to choose to commit ourselves to not give into that. Absolutely.

Peter Kelly: 55:19

One of the one of the most fortunate things I've had in my life is I've had a couple of key people who they will boost me up when I'm low and when I need encouragement, but they're not afraid to take me aside when when I'm wrong. And let me know when I'm wrong. If you get a couple of people like that in your life, hold on to them.

Yonason Goldson: 55:38

Yeah, yeah, make wonderful to have conversations. And you know, we're, as we're as we're getting, we're living longer. But the quality of life is not always keeping pace with our age. And, you know, watch my father declined into dimension, and Alzheimer's. One of the best ways to delay the deterioration of our faculties is to talk to people we disagree with. We, we we have to defend our positions better. We have to understand where they're coming from. And if we do that, we're going to come out more well rounded people, more balanced people, and we're going to contribute to a more balanced society,

Peter Kelly: 56:29

you'll literally be healthier if you listen to people who disagree with.

Margarita Gurri: 56:34

So Peter Kelly, what is the final either word of wisdom or call to action you have regarding video editing and ethics.

Peter Kelly: 56:47

It's so big that just just be honest, and have faith in your point of view whenever you portray an opposing point of view. And

Yonason Goldson: 56:59

remember what Mark Twain said, If you always tell the truth, you can have a lousy memory. But if you lie, big enough to remember every lie, you tell,

Peter Kelly: 57:11

it's so much easier to be honest,

Margarita Gurri: 57:13

it is so hard to remember a lie. I mean, even when you've rehearsed, you know, that when the hard way when I was a kid,

Yonason Goldson: 57:21

so Doctor, do you have a last word for us?

Margarita Gurri: 57:23

Well, I think I do. Um, I am grateful. I know the rabbi and I both grateful that you've joined us, Peter Kelly, for us. This speaks to the heart of what we're inspiring folks to do to have faith in themselves to love themselves, to have enough courage to really look at what is and challenge their perception of that gives. What is it sometimes confusing? and ask questions and listen, listen, listen, research things, don't just assume that what you learned in biology class, half a lifetime ago, still serves you well. So my point of view at this point is, if you're not sure how to move forward in the world of video, contact Peter Kelly, contact the rabbi and I contact other people that you can have a good discussion with people who don't have to be right all the time. But who know how to think about being right and being wrong, and missing the facts or not. And I think videos, storytelling, Peter Kelly's what you do better than anyone that I know. I love the stuff you put together for Rita Miller, and some of the stuff you put together for me. I think that telling the truth, and being at the top of your game can go hand in hand. And I think Peter Kelly is a really good example of that. And may you always continue to be successful all of you like Peter Kelly, knowing that you tell the truth, you're more likely to succeed, because you're telling a story that resonates. That's all I have to say to everyone is be well, and we will see you next Tuesday at 1230. Eastern. Thanks again, Peter Kelly, and Rabbi again. Thank you always for for joining us.

Yonason Goldson: 59:16

Thank you. Thank you, Peter, for being with us.