MovieChat Forums > My Kid Could Paint That (2007) Discussion > The two real lessons here:

The two real lessons here:

posted 12 years ago by TheManInOil
5 replies | jump to latest

1 - Never go to the press thinking you can use them as free advertising. 60 Minutes' smear piece was predictable for just the reason cited in the film - that they had to change the story to make it theirs and keep it vital. Whether the kid really did the paintings or not, 60 Minutes would have made the same piece.

2 - People generally are WAY to ready to believe they know what's going on based on one source. The hate mail following the 60 Minutes coverage is proof. Once again, forget whether the kid did the paintings alone or not. Regardless, the people who's only source of information on the subject was a 60 Minutes segment had no real idea what the truth is. This didn't stop them talking about damning the parents to hell etc.

As the original journalist says near the end, this really is a story about what happens to stories, and it says a lot more about the adults reacting to it all than it does about the kid or her family.

"I'll book you. I'll book you on something. I'll find something in the book to book you on."

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cookiela2001 12 years ago

<< 60 minutes is serious investigative journalism. They are not a news station, they investigate the stories and not just report them. >>

Um, yeah. I just saw this film last night for the first time, and can't grasp why anyone would criticize 60 Minutes for their report. They spent a long time preparing it, and they have very high standards. Hmmmm, who will we give more weight to...60 Minutes, or the subject's dad?

[–] joneskeller07 9 years ago

60 Minutes is a reliable news source? Hardly. This is where television tabloid news began. Their job is to twist what could have more than likely been a linear narrative. We watch 69 Minutes for the inevitable car wreck. Anyone who agrees to be the topic of an episode has every reason to know they will not come out untarnished. This is journalism fit for a high school student, at best. And, no one said that all humans won't watch a car wreck.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jorgemgarcia25 9 years ago

I understand your points, but I'm not sure I agree with them. I for one do NOT watch 60 Minutes to watch a "car wreck". I feel confident that what I've seen from them over many years is journalism with integrity. Have they fudged up big time in the past? Yes indeed. We've seen it recently with their Benghazi story. But if you report on 1000's of stories, mistakes can happen. Even the NYT or the WP are not free of blemishes. If I want to watch a car wreck, I'll tune into my evening news or TMZ. Last nights episode covered the impact of the ongoing war in Syria and the issues present when health insurers are denying coverage for care of the mentally ill. I enjoyed both, and too be honest, they are really the only news magazine show on TV capable of providing actual journalism.

With regard to this Marla piece, I believe the BEST story would be the one WITHOUT controversy. I wanted to see them confirm conclusively that this child created these paintings from A to Z using only her own skills. That would be an exciting story about a child prodigy anyone can feel good about. I'm sure 60 Minutes would have preferred to air that story. The fact that their investigation discovered a potential problem was actually a big bummer for the viewer, and likely to them as well. And they did actually "investigate". They insisted on setting up a hidden camera to capture the child at work, they had an art expert provide her opinion and they interviewed everyone who has had a hand in the child's development. That's a thorough investigation and certainly not "high school journalism". What more would you want them to do?