Doesn't 'editing' usually mean splicing in this context? Clipping is usually accepted as necessary because shows have fixed length. There's always going to be some changes from what's taped to what's broadcast.

Is the 'incoherent "word salad"' a quote from the source? The quoted original isn’t exactly on-point, but it’s easy enough to understand for me as a non-native speaker.

@MisterMiyagi It's taken from OP's original wording, and while the 9GAG post itself doesn't claim that, the two most upvoted comments do.

This question would have been far better if the 9gag link was replaced with anything else. The comments in that link range from absolutely disgusting to mildly revolting. There are lots of other references that claim the interview on 60 Minutes was edited.

I'm highly skeptical of the allegation itself as her words, while a bit hard to understand on first listen due to the halting delivery and run-on sentence structure of what is clearly an impromptu answer, is far from what I would consider a "word salad". A political meme posted on a social media platform with an abundantly clear strong bias does not make for credible allegations of this nature.

@MisterMiyagi : it's the 2nd most highly rated comment. However the most highly rated said "Both answers are complete gibberish".

@Abion47 Agree, the first answer is an understandable spoken sentence. It says that the US "advocated" for Israel to act a certain way, and some of it worked in several occasions, but other factors also influenced Israel. In other words, she says Israel listens to the US somewhat.

@Oddthinking It’s not the claim under discussion though, is it? The question is whether the interview was edited, not whether it is "complete gibberish" or "word salad" (which don’t really seem to be notable claims that can be answered with facts).

@MisterMiyagi word-salad is a crucial part of why it would be interesting -- if 60 minutes "heavily edited" out an answer that made her sound incompetent. Otherwise all we have is "does 60 minutes edit interviews?"

@OwenReynolds I don’t see how that is relevant. The source already includes the original, there’s no question that more was removed. Framing this as "making her sound incompetent" or worse needlessly loads the question, it doesn’t add anything for answers to address. We still only have "does 60 minutes edit interviews?" plus bait.

@user76284 Not word salad. Intentionally answering a question other than the question that was asked, perhaps, but not word salad. Answering a question other than the question that was asked is standard fare for politicians, especially when faced with a question along the lines of "when did you stop beating your wife???" Editing an interview to fit the allotted time is standard fare for both radio and TV interviews. This imbroglio is a big fat nothing burger.

@Oddthinking There's a difference between asking a question with a biased premise and having the source of that biased premise be... well... that.

@user76284 The context of the question is whether the US has had any sway in Israeli's (and specifically Netanyahu's) actions, and her original answer is a pretty typical politician's answer to the question. Just because it wasn't particularly well delivered here doesn't make it a word salad.

@Albion47: I am responding to "A political meme posted on a social media platform with an abundantly clear strong bias does not make for credible allegations of this nature." On this site, a political meme posted on a social media platform with an abundantly clear strong bias, seen by enough people, is excellent fodder for a question, and should be upvoted.

Telling that the moderator decided to selectively delete my comment while keeping the rest of the comments intact.

@user76284 Par for the course for the moderator in question. Don't expect moderator oversight on SO in general but especially on this site, they can pretty much do whatever they want and handwave Meta criticism away by posting "answers" that say nothing.

@Prometheus: So typical of mods here. Doing their job, and then supporting their positions in meta when questioned.

@user76284 Looking at the history, it appears your comment was flagged as abusive, which is why it was selectively acted upon. I didn't delete it myself, but I stand behind the decision.