MUST. CREDIT. REASON. Austin Bragg offers up this quick-hitting goof on Katie Couric’s idea of journalism with this sauce-for-the-goose mashup of Couric interviews. The Yahoo News anchor and the star of the recently discredited Under the Gun documentary discusses her views of journalism and the main skills one needs to learn. Mainly, that’s editing, Couric “explains”:

There are some timeless skills that you need to really hone in order to be a good journalist — that is, you need to learn how to edit, and edit well. There’s so many opportunities for aggressive editing or whatever. And I wish I’d studied journalism more, more, more rigorously. I mean, it’s no secret or surprise that I don’t necessarily understand journalism, but I’m in the process of trying to figure it out. And I don’t know, it leaves me with a feeling of profound inadequacy.

Hey, under Epix/Under the Gun/Couric rules, that’s totally acceptable, right? Who cares if part of the tape shows Couric’s lips not moving while she talks? After all, it doesn’t matter if Couric never actually said the above in the order given. What really matters is the “creative and editorial judgment” used to cement the narrative. We already know from the fakery employed in Under the Gun that Couric’s journalistic judgment suffers from “profound inadequacy,” so … fake but accurate, right? Right?

Speaking of which, Mollie Hemingway offers up a reminder that Couric doesn’t always apply her elastic journalistic ethics consistently. After David Daleiden conducted a free-lance undercover investigation that showed Planned Parenthood bargaining for best prices on fetal tissue — and released his unedited tapes — Couric jumped into the fray to boost Cecile Richards with a softball interview. And guess what offended Couric the most at the time?

Indeed, when Katie Couric ran interference for Cecile Richards, doing a lengthy sit-down puffball interview and a tour of an abortion clinic where she didn’t once mention, uh, abortion, she twice decried the videos as “edited.”

An accompanying write-up of one interview falsely stated:

The videos, some of which were edited together in a way to depict Planned Parenthood employees talking about selling fetal tissue, which is illegal, rocked the organization.

The media have straight-up adopted Planned Parenthood’s false “deceptively edited” talking points and carried the water for Planned Parenthood’s campaign against the Center for Medical Progress. Here, one of their perky own in the mainstream media is caught red-handed actually deceptively editing in the service of gun control, and the most outrage The New York Times can muster is the headline, “Audio of Katie Couric interview shows editing slant in documentary, site claims.” What a joke our mainstream media are.

Site claims“? The NYT’s Katie Rogers only had to listen to the unedited audio and compare it to the scene from the “documentary” to report that the actual response in the former had been replaced with a fake response. This isn’t a dispute about two perspectives; the audio shows objectively that Under the Gun cooked the response. It doesn’t actually take that much effort to investigate the “claim” made by the Free Beacon’s Stephen Gutowski. If the documentarian had been David Daleiden, one can safely bet that the Gray Lady’s reporters would have put more effort into actual reporting on the topic.

There seems to be an awful lot of “profound inadequacy” in the mainstream media these days.