James O'Keefe29 January 2022

The State Of Modern Journalism - James O'Keefe - #428

0Frameworks

10Insights

Insights & moments

The myth-busts, hot takes, explainers, and tools worth keeping.

Myth Buster· 1

Myth Buster03:30

FBI Charges Journalist as Accessory for Receiving Stolen Documents

The FBI charged O'Keefe with 'misprision of a felony'—essentially being an accessory after the fact—for possessing the diary. O'Keefe argues this is unconstitutional, citing Supreme Court precedent that journalists can publish stolen documents as long as they didn’t steal them. He calls the charge preposterous, noting it could apply to any journalist who receives leaked material.

Charged with misprision of a felony for possessing a stolen document.
O'Keefe argues this violates First Amendment protections for journalists.
Supreme Court precedent (Bartnicki v. Vopper) allows publishing stolen documents if not involved in theft.
Calls the charge absurd, saying it would criminalize mainstream journalism.

“Miss prison of a felony is a very seldom prosecuted crime... it would imply that all journalists in every newsroom should be incarcerated.”
James O'Keefe · 04:00

#first-amendment#fbi#legal-ethics#journalism-law#project-veritas

Explainer· 3

Explainer01:00

Federal Judge Cites Journalistic Privilege in O’Keefe Case

A federal judge in New York halted the FBI’s review of O'Keefe’s phones, invoking journalistic privilege. This rare legal protection shields journalists from having their sources and materials seized. The judge’s decision is seen as a major win for press freedom and sets a precedent in defending journalists from government overreach.

Judge stopped FBI from reviewing O'Keefe’s phones.
Cited journalistic privilege, a rare but critical protection.
Special master assigned to oversee the process.
O'Keefe not charged, and the ruling seen as a win for press freedom.

“The federal judge cited journalistic privilege, which is a big win for Project Veritas.”
James O'Keefe · 01:00

#journalism#first-amendment#legal-victory#fbi#press-freedom

Explainer18:00

James O’Keefe’s Ethical Justification for Undercover Reporting

O'Keefe defends the use of deception in undercover journalism by framing it as a choice: deceive the audience or deceive the subject. He argues it’s more ethical to deceive the subject to reveal truth to the public. He distinguishes this from entrapment or eavesdropping, emphasizing that subjects know they’re being interviewed—even if secretly recorded.

Believes deception of subject is ethical if it reveals truth to the public.
Argues undercover work is not entrapment or eavesdropping.
Subjects know they’re being interviewed, even if recording is hidden.
Prefers deceiving subject over deceiving audience.

“You have two choices: you can deceive the audience or you can deceive your subject. I prefer to deceive my subject such that I can…”
James O'Keefe · 19:00

#ethics#undercover-journalism#deception#media-ethics#project-veritas

Explainer15:00

Why Secret Recording Is Legal in 38 States

In 38 U.S. states, it’s legal to record a conversation as long as one party consents—which includes the person doing the recording. O'Keefe argues this is a constitutional right, comparing recording to taking notes. He notes that in states like Massachusetts and Oregon, such laws have been challenged and overturned by Project Veritas on constitutional grounds.

One-party consent laws apply in 38 states.
Recording is legally equivalent to taking notes.
Project Veritas successfully challenged draconian recording laws in Massachusetts.
Argues recording is protected under First Amendment principles.

“In 38 states, it's perfectly legal so long as one party is consenting.”
James O'Keefe · 15:00

“We've been very successful in federal court in Massachusetts—we overturned the law.”
James O'Keefe · 17:00

#recording-law#first-amendment#project-veritas#legal-ethics#journalism

Story· 4

Story00:30

FBI Raids James O'Keefe’s Apartment and Seizes Phones

In November, the FBI raided James O'Keefe’s apartment with a battering ram, handcuffed him, and seized two phones—though not his laptop or iPad. The raid was conducted under a federal search warrant tied to his possession of Ashley Biden’s diary. A federal judge later halted the FBI’s review of the phones, citing journalistic privilege and assigning a special master to oversee the process.

FBI raided O'Keefe’s home and seized two phones in November.
Search warrant linked to Ashley Biden’s diary, which O'Keefe received from a source.
Federal judge stopped FBI from reviewing phones, citing journalistic privilege.
Special master assigned to oversee the case; O'Keefe not charged with any crime.

“The FBI stole your phone as well. Have you got that back yet?”
Host · 00:30

“They took two phones in a raid against me in November... the federal judge ordered the FBI to stop going through my phones.”
James O'Keefe · 01:00

#fbi#journalism#first-amendment#search-warrant#project-veritas

Story09:00

Project Veritas Sues New York Times for Defamation and Wins

Project Veritas sued The New York Times for defamation after the paper falsely labeled their videos as 'deceptive.' In a landmark ruling in New York State—a traditionally unfriendly jurisdiction—the judge ruled in favor of Veritas, finding the Times acted with 'disinformation and deception.' The case underscores that even mainstream outlets can be held accountable for false claims.

Sued NYT for calling their videos 'deceptive' without evidence.
Won in New York State court, a non-friendly jurisdiction.
Judge ruled NYT acted with disinformation and deception.
Highlights that defamation laws apply even to public figures.

“We sued the New York Times for defamation and we won a historic victory... the judge ruled it was the New York Times that acted…”
James O'Keefe · 09:00

#defamation#new-york-times#lawsuit#media-accountability#project-veritas

Story40:00

Twitter Bans James O’Keefe for Quoting CNN

O'Keefe was banned from Twitter for quoting a CNN executive who called Project Veritas 'propaganda.' Ironically, the man he quoted was not banned. O'Keefe sued Twitter for defamation, calling the ban a red pill moment that revealed the platform’s bias. He says it marked the end of his idealism about free speech online.

Banned for quoting a CNN executive calling Veritas 'propaganda'.
The quoted executive was not banned.
Sued Twitter for defamation over the ban.
Called it a 'red pill' moment that shattered his idealism.

“They banned me for quoting the control room director at CNN saying we're propaganda. They didn't ban him.”
James O'Keefe · 41:00

“That was my red pill moment. I woke up from my idealism just a little bit.”
James O'Keefe · 42:00

#twitter#censorship#free-speech#social-media#project-veritas

Story48:00

Project Veritas Exposes CNN Producer Soliciting Underage Images

Project Veritas exposed CNN producer Rick Saleeby for soliciting sexual images of a 15-year-old girl during Facetime calls. The investigation included audio evidence and led to Saleeby resigning. O'Keefe says they prioritized the safety of minors and acted ethically by blurring identities and alerting the fiancée first.

Exposed CNN producer Rick Saleeby soliciting images of a 15-year-old.
Had audio evidence from Facetime calls.
Blurred identities and notified fiancée before release.
Led to Saleeby’s resignation and police involvement.

“Rick Saleeby was soliciting pictures of a 15-year-old girl... sexual fantasies about his fiancée's underage daughter.”
James O'Keefe · 49:00

#cnn#investigation#ethics#minor-protection#project-veritas

Q&A· 1

Q&A01:30

Why James O’Keefe Chose Not to Publish Ashley Biden’s Diary

O'Keefe received Ashley Biden’s diary from a source and considered publishing it, but ultimately decided against it. He was not 100% certain of its authenticity and felt publishing private musings—especially those possibly written under the influence or as poetry—was unethical. He cited Hemingway, saying ethics in journalism often come down to what you feel bad about afterward.

Received diary but did not publish due to uncertainty and ethical concerns.
Diary contained unverified claims, including inappropriate showers with her father.
O'Keefe felt the public shouldn’t see private, potentially poetic writings.
Quoted Hemingway: 'What is moral is what you feel good after.'

“I did not run the story... I made the decision which was very controversial internally at Project Veritas to not run this diary.”
James O'Keefe · 02:00

“There's something wrong about it. I don't think the public eye should see it.”
James O'Keefe · 35:30

#ethics#journalism#ashley-biden#media-decision#privacy

Takeaway· 1

Takeaway46:00

Project Veritas’ Core Ethical Rule: Always Act Like a Jury Is Watching

O'Keefe shares that Project Veritas operates under a strict ethical guideline: always behave as if a jury is watching. This means transparency, honesty, and legal compliance in all actions. He argues this mindset protects against false accusations and ensures accountability, even when working undercover.

Core rule: 'Always behave like there’s a jury in the room.'
Promotes transparency and legal compliance.
Helps defend against false accusations.
Applies even when alone or in private settings.

“Always behave like there's a jury in the room watching everything you do and say—even when you're alone.”
James O'Keefe · 46:30

#ethics#accountability#project-veritas#journalism#legal-compliance