What do you think?
Rate this book
American Pravda: My Fight for Truth in the Era of Fake News
The one real difference between the American press and the Soviet state newspaper Pravda was that the Russian people knew they were being lied to. To expose the lies our media tell us today, controversial journalist James O’Keefe created Project Veritas, an independent news organization whose reporters go where traditional journalists dare not. Their investigative work–equal parts James Bond, Mike Wallace, and Saul Alinsky—has had a consistent and powerful impact on its targets.
In American Pravda, the reader is invited to go undercover with these intrepid journalists as they infiltrate political campaigns, unmask dishonest officials and expose voter fraud. A rollicking adventure story on one level, the book also serves as a treatise on modern media, arguing that establishment journalists have a vested interest in keeping the powerful comfortable and the people misinformed.
The book not only contests the false narratives frequently put forth by corporate media, it documents the consequences of telling the truth in a world that does not necessarily want to hear it. O’Keefe’s enemies attack with lawsuits, smear campaigns, political prosecutions, and false charges in an effort to shut down Project Veritas. For O’Keefe, every one of these attacks is a sign of success.
American Pravda puts the myths and misconceptions surrounding O’Keefe’s activities to rest and will make you rethink every word you hear and read in the so-called mainstream press.
322 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 16, 2018
129 people are currently reading
516 people want to read
About the author
James O'Keefe
10 books87 followersJames O’Keefe founded Project Veritas, Project Veritas Action and the O’Keefe Media Group, after he had pulled off some of the most consequential undercover journalism coups in a generation, so he could have an organization dedicated to reviving the craft of undercover journalism. These two organizations are non-profits dedicated to investigating corruption, dishonesty, waste and fraud in public institutions and the private sector.
The undercover journalism O’Keefe has pioneered at Project Veritas relies on the most modern digital and video technology infused with the legacy of the great investigative journalists of the past, such as Nellie Bly, Mike Wallace, Gunter Wallraff and Woodward and Bernstein.
Aside from leading Project Veritas and Project Veritas Action, O’Keefe is the author of two best-selling books, Breakthrough: Our guerilla war to expose fraud and save democracy, published in 2013, and American Pravda: My fight for truth in the era of Fake News, published in 2018. Both books are personal and revealing works about both his experiences on the line of scrimmage of American democracy and his take on what mainstream media has become and what it should be.
The undercover journalism O’Keefe has pioneered at Project Veritas relies on the most modern digital and video technology infused with the legacy of the great investigative journalists of the past, such as Nellie Bly, Mike Wallace, Gunter Wallraff and Woodward and Bernstein.
Aside from leading Project Veritas and Project Veritas Action, O’Keefe is the author of two best-selling books, Breakthrough: Our guerilla war to expose fraud and save democracy, published in 2013, and American Pravda: My fight for truth in the era of Fake News, published in 2018. Both books are personal and revealing works about both his experiences on the line of scrimmage of American democracy and his take on what mainstream media has become and what it should be.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews
January 20, 2022
Excellent book. Lots of detail and "eyes" of the exact periods and witnesses, as well as name, place, etc. Sources being named and situations posited in precise terms of what occurred or did not occur. As opposed to the fake news which only states entire "eyes" bias to the most negative definitions and altered to context news interpretation pieces. Redefining in base connotations too -of the highlighted "facts" that are murky for their origins. And also consistently embedded within some form of angry reaction for the great majority of "news" breaks copy. "News" also that doesn't begin to be core important to the highest priorities or events of the average day. Or week. The juxtapositions of the players in what is now the slithery media "estate" is displayed well for his particular routes to what, where, how, who. Remember all those questions taught in journalism school? What are they teaching now?
Following the money here is especially informative. As is it a definitive piece for the Project Veritas entity.
It remains incredulous to me that Leftists are so filled with Trump Derangement Syndrome that they really could begin to believe than the Russians caused all those millions of Americans in a dozen ignored and abused to neglect for their citizens' concerns states to pull the "other" lever when they voted in the 2016 election.
Following the money here is especially informative. As is it a definitive piece for the Project Veritas entity.
It remains incredulous to me that Leftists are so filled with Trump Derangement Syndrome that they really could begin to believe than the Russians caused all those millions of Americans in a dozen ignored and abused to neglect for their citizens' concerns states to pull the "other" lever when they voted in the 2016 election.
July 25, 2019
An angel on one shoulder whispers to me to be careful when reviewing this book. The devil on the other begs me to string together paragraphs expressing shock and outrage at O'Keefe's methods and lies, to decry O'Keefe as a shocking transgressor of journalism's sacred boundaries, and to ramble on about how much O'Keefe hates the little guy. Then my angel chimes again, reminding me that O'Keefe is just another grifter in a line dating at least as far back as Joseph Smith and his golden plates, about as cataclysmic as bringing 13 items to a 12 item limit shopping line, and fucking brilliant at self owning. "Remember that time he thought he could seduce a CNN reporter," my angel says, "you should definitely mention that."
I guess my angel has a bit of a dirty mind.
O'Keefe's Project Veritas uses undercover journalists to surreptitiously record "candid" comments from their targets. The ethics of this are complicated, fortunately Project Veritas makes it less so by punching way down with their targets, including as a "corrupt $2 billion community organizing cartel", teachers unions, and church vans bussing voters to polling booths. Project Veritas engages in classy undercover behaviour such as creating a new form of voter fraud involving abandoned properties to entrap targets and, if caught, having as a cover story "Soros hired us". Oh yeah, and trying to seduce reporters.
While O'Keefe (rightly) lays into the established media over its coverage of the 2016 election, if in overly conspiratorial tones, his statement that Project Veritas is only in it for "free speech and honest government" is either imbecilic, or assumes his readers are. Aside from repeatedly targeting perceived enemies of the Republican party O'Keefe, in his own book:
- pitches directly to Trump a story damaging to Clinton and accepts Trump's advice as to timing its release.
- admits Trump is a donor to Project Veritas and the need to be friendly with donors; and
- claims credit for Trump winning the 2016 election, enjoying his success by signing MAGA hats.
In terms of actual contribution to that election, Project Veritas donated $20,000 to the Democrats. Yes, they are that incredibly stupid. With that down payment they might have proved that Hillary wanted someone dressed as duck to go Trump rallies, that Hillary might have caused a traffic jam, and that Hillary might have forced Trump to cancel a rally due to a risk of violence. Reflecting that the Democrats are the party of losers, they returned that money.
In terms of "setting the scene" around the main story O'Keefe introduces us to Austrian economic theory, rails against those evil post modernists and regales us with past glories. Apparently O'Keefe thinks it is quite unfair for Border Patrol to keep interrogating him each time he crossed the border, just because he did illegally that one time, dressed as Osama Bin Laden. There's plenty of gibberish with "citation needed" interspersed within: saying Democrats pay people to vote without any evidence is kind of libellous, and endnoting a statement that a worker at a polling booth told someone to vote for Hillary Clinton with "Project Veritas recording," unlinked is, charitably speaking, fucking lazy.
There are some hilariously unself-aware comments in here, like that each receptionist in Trump's office was more beautiful than the last, that a pot bellied sheriff looked straight from "Central Casting," and that Bruce Springsteen is "totalitarian minded." Never one to miss the chance to repackage an old joke and make it less funny, O'Keefe opens a chapter with: "If prostitution is the oldest profession, intelligence-gathering is a close second." Probably the best is O'Keefe working himself into a lather over Johnny McEntee's comments that McEntee could 100 percent guarantee Trump would win. After O'Keefe wrote this, McEntee was fired from the White House due to an alleged gambling addiction.
If the angel on your shoulder says this is a good book and not a bloated self-justification for self manufacturing Welfare Queens, fine. Maybe just check who's paying that angel first though.
I guess my angel has a bit of a dirty mind.
O'Keefe's Project Veritas uses undercover journalists to surreptitiously record "candid" comments from their targets. The ethics of this are complicated, fortunately Project Veritas makes it less so by punching way down with their targets, including as a "corrupt $2 billion community organizing cartel", teachers unions, and church vans bussing voters to polling booths. Project Veritas engages in classy undercover behaviour such as creating a new form of voter fraud involving abandoned properties to entrap targets and, if caught, having as a cover story "Soros hired us". Oh yeah, and trying to seduce reporters.
While O'Keefe (rightly) lays into the established media over its coverage of the 2016 election, if in overly conspiratorial tones, his statement that Project Veritas is only in it for "free speech and honest government" is either imbecilic, or assumes his readers are. Aside from repeatedly targeting perceived enemies of the Republican party O'Keefe, in his own book:
- pitches directly to Trump a story damaging to Clinton and accepts Trump's advice as to timing its release.
- admits Trump is a donor to Project Veritas and the need to be friendly with donors; and
- claims credit for Trump winning the 2016 election, enjoying his success by signing MAGA hats.
In terms of actual contribution to that election, Project Veritas donated $20,000 to the Democrats. Yes, they are that incredibly stupid. With that down payment they might have proved that Hillary wanted someone dressed as duck to go Trump rallies, that Hillary might have caused a traffic jam, and that Hillary might have forced Trump to cancel a rally due to a risk of violence. Reflecting that the Democrats are the party of losers, they returned that money.
In terms of "setting the scene" around the main story O'Keefe introduces us to Austrian economic theory, rails against those evil post modernists and regales us with past glories. Apparently O'Keefe thinks it is quite unfair for Border Patrol to keep interrogating him each time he crossed the border, just because he did illegally that one time, dressed as Osama Bin Laden. There's plenty of gibberish with "citation needed" interspersed within: saying Democrats pay people to vote without any evidence is kind of libellous, and endnoting a statement that a worker at a polling booth told someone to vote for Hillary Clinton with "Project Veritas recording," unlinked is, charitably speaking, fucking lazy.
There are some hilariously unself-aware comments in here, like that each receptionist in Trump's office was more beautiful than the last, that a pot bellied sheriff looked straight from "Central Casting," and that Bruce Springsteen is "totalitarian minded." Never one to miss the chance to repackage an old joke and make it less funny, O'Keefe opens a chapter with: "If prostitution is the oldest profession, intelligence-gathering is a close second." Probably the best is O'Keefe working himself into a lather over Johnny McEntee's comments that McEntee could 100 percent guarantee Trump would win. After O'Keefe wrote this, McEntee was fired from the White House due to an alleged gambling addiction.
If the angel on your shoulder says this is a good book and not a bloated self-justification for self manufacturing Welfare Queens, fine. Maybe just check who's paying that angel first though.
September 30, 2022
Just, wow. Why the hell did I read this.
But in the spirit of not being a hypocrite, it is absolutely worth noting that the government harassment of this dickhead fits the pattern and is just as BS and undemocratic as it is when they do it to anyone else. But man this guy sucks, if nothing else harassing him only encourages people to side with him as the underdog. moreover, I respect his rhetoric about journalism, just not him.
O'Keefe is generally good at seeing that the corporate media blows, and even much of why it does -- but he's absolutely incapable of seeing his own faults, or he's just really committed to the lie. I bet on the former, always bet on ignorance and stupidity over evil. But the thing that just sticks in my craw is that he takes the absolute worst, most offensive, lie of the corporate media for himself "I'm unbiased". Bullshit. And fuck you if you think I'm buying it. He repeatedly brings up how he's written off as a "conservative" and says it's just code of the ruling elite to discredit him. Bullshit, he absolutely is. He argues constitutionalism, traditional moral values, and traditional social mores. He's a open Trump pundit, glories in being loved by the alt-right and conservatives, and is generally a weaselly little shit. He supports the century-old tradition of "voter-fraud" narratives and efforts to restrict the vote, he caters to religious conspiracy theories about satanic cults, and for all his hooplah about being harassed by the deep/surveillance state he wants the right to record anyone, anywhere, and edit that recording freely and make it public without the prior party's consent -- and much worse, by far, he wants the government to be even more oppressive vis the entire "anti terrorism" farce and engage in mass deportation.
He's a shitbag with a childish love of 007 games.
But in the spirit of not being a hypocrite, it is absolutely worth noting that the government harassment of this dickhead fits the pattern and is just as BS and undemocratic as it is when they do it to anyone else. But man this guy sucks, if nothing else harassing him only encourages people to side with him as the underdog. moreover, I respect his rhetoric about journalism, just not him.
O'Keefe is generally good at seeing that the corporate media blows, and even much of why it does -- but he's absolutely incapable of seeing his own faults, or he's just really committed to the lie. I bet on the former, always bet on ignorance and stupidity over evil. But the thing that just sticks in my craw is that he takes the absolute worst, most offensive, lie of the corporate media for himself "I'm unbiased". Bullshit. And fuck you if you think I'm buying it. He repeatedly brings up how he's written off as a "conservative" and says it's just code of the ruling elite to discredit him. Bullshit, he absolutely is. He argues constitutionalism, traditional moral values, and traditional social mores. He's a open Trump pundit, glories in being loved by the alt-right and conservatives, and is generally a weaselly little shit. He supports the century-old tradition of "voter-fraud" narratives and efforts to restrict the vote, he caters to religious conspiracy theories about satanic cults, and for all his hooplah about being harassed by the deep/surveillance state he wants the right to record anyone, anywhere, and edit that recording freely and make it public without the prior party's consent -- and much worse, by far, he wants the government to be even more oppressive vis the entire "anti terrorism" farce and engage in mass deportation.
He's a shitbag with a childish love of 007 games.
January 29, 2019
Whether you think mainstream journalism is biased, unbiased, or flat-out fake, you need to read this book.
O'Keefe begins by defining what journalism actually is, even providing a look-back in history at prominent examples of successful journalism (Upton Sinclair's work in the meatpacking industry, for example). In addition, he addresses all the primary accusations that have been made against him and Project Veritas, proving the accusations to be both disingenuous and false.
After providing this background and framework, O'Keefe begins to expose the mainstream media for its extreme left-wing bias. And he does so brilliantly. After all, many chapters in the book are a blow-by-blow account of the undercover stings Project Veritas has carried out.
It helps if you've already watched Project Veritas' "Rigging the Election," DisruptJ20, and "American Pravda" videos. But the book is still very much worth reading because it describes how each operation was set up, how some undercover reporters got burned, what happened after the videos went public, and so on. There's a whole wealth of behind-the-scenes context that you don't get from the videos alone.
And throughout the book there are valuable insights and commentary on the current state of journalism and mainstream media. For example, this gem on page 82: "The media, as communications guru Elihu Katz famously noted, can 'construct reality and impose their construction on defenseless minds.' The independent journalist can deconstruct that 'reality' and give citizens the information needed to make up their own minds."
I don't think I'm overstating my case when I say every American should read this book. It's that important.
O'Keefe begins by defining what journalism actually is, even providing a look-back in history at prominent examples of successful journalism (Upton Sinclair's work in the meatpacking industry, for example). In addition, he addresses all the primary accusations that have been made against him and Project Veritas, proving the accusations to be both disingenuous and false.
After providing this background and framework, O'Keefe begins to expose the mainstream media for its extreme left-wing bias. And he does so brilliantly. After all, many chapters in the book are a blow-by-blow account of the undercover stings Project Veritas has carried out.
It helps if you've already watched Project Veritas' "Rigging the Election," DisruptJ20, and "American Pravda" videos. But the book is still very much worth reading because it describes how each operation was set up, how some undercover reporters got burned, what happened after the videos went public, and so on. There's a whole wealth of behind-the-scenes context that you don't get from the videos alone.
And throughout the book there are valuable insights and commentary on the current state of journalism and mainstream media. For example, this gem on page 82: "The media, as communications guru Elihu Katz famously noted, can 'construct reality and impose their construction on defenseless minds.' The independent journalist can deconstruct that 'reality' and give citizens the information needed to make up their own minds."
I don't think I'm overstating my case when I say every American should read this book. It's that important.
January 30, 2018
A book of major consequence. James O’Keefe and his team are muckrakers in the perfect time and place. This was an extremely enjoyable, funny, and exciting read well worth the time and money. I look forward to many more great decades with PVA.👍🏻👍🏻
December 11, 2020
What discouraged Solzhenitsyn, who had been living in the United States for several years, was the media’s indifference to truth and their unwillingness to pursue it. “One gradually discovers a common trend of preference within the Western press as a whole,” he said. “It is a fashion; there are generally accepted patterns of judgment; there may be common corporate interests, the sum effect being not competition but unification.” As he saw it, the media were squandering their freedom.
This was written by a very different James O’Keefe than the one who wrote Breakthrough. He’s more humble, delegating to people within an organization he built from the successes described in the earlier book. He’s still self-deprecating, but his praise is directed to the Project Veritas journalists who go undercover to expose voter fraud, manipulatory practices by the media, and even, inadvertently, how government bureaucracies stifle media outlets.
The Federal Communications Commission, Lee explained, was always eager to shut Salem down, but the company had learned to negotiate around it. The media companies most vulnerable, I was learning, were those that were publicly owned and traded, especially those that lacked a genuine mission. With these companies, the threat of a major lawsuit, an FC action, or even a bluff from the Department of Justice could roil the markets and cost shareholders millions.
This O’Keefe is also a more experienced writer. This reads very much like a series of short thrillers, leading up to the 2016 election. The major stories are (somewhat topically) exposing voter fraud in Wisconsin in the Democracy Partners exposé, which led to an exposé of organized attempts by Democrats, including the official Party, to disrupt Trump campaign stops—and, later, the inauguration—and either fake or cause violence at them; and exposing the virulent bias inside CNN and the New York Times.
The tension in these thrillers come as much from getting the story out as from getting the story. Getting locked out of Twitter at crucial moments, discovering that a once-friendly media outlet doesn’t want to offend future President Hillary Clinton, or getting bounced from interviews just as a story is supposed to go public. And then overcoming it with, say, the “weaponized autism” of Reddit, or simply through persistently and (im)patiently battering down the walls the media erects.
There’s also an interesting short history of undercover journalism.
I have to sympathize with the publishers of Pravda. They were working with a gun to their heads. Their American counterparts have no such excuse.
February 18, 2018
Too many news outlets and schools believe they have the responsibility to digest and tailor the news and history for the American people. James O’keefe, director of Project Veritas, believes the public is capable of making their own decisions if they are given unvarnished information. His organization has an exceptional track record of exposing liberal bias by Universities and media outlets, as well as crimes and deceit by organizations like Planned Parenthood. He has been particularly effective at exposing electoral fraud. Keep up the good work!
March 28, 2018
Thoroughly enjoyed reading AMERICAN PRAVDA by my pal @JamesOKeefeIII. The title especially piqued my interest since my family lived through the real Pravda and subsequent propaganda in the Soviet Union. Lots of parallels. Full review coming at @resurgent tomorrow! Stay tuned
March 1, 2018
You can't handle the truth!
Great book. Insightful and honest about the liberal media and the way they affect our lives. The best disinfectant is sunshine.
Great book. Insightful and honest about the liberal media and the way they affect our lives. The best disinfectant is sunshine.
April 19, 2021
In the times where you have to put so much effort into finding out what really happens behind the scenes and 'fact-checking' those who call anyone who disagrees with the mainstream media narrative a conspiracy theorist, it's refreshing to hear the account of people who are responsible for uncovering truths.
I cannot wait to read James O'Keefe's future books about the continued corruption in politics and hopefully Pharma.
I cannot wait to read James O'Keefe's future books about the continued corruption in politics and hopefully Pharma.
March 25, 2018
Talking about the blind leading the blind. An ignoramus who has a vague Hollywood film noir stereotype image of Soviet Russia talking about things who knows just as well. Militating with Chomsky for the total state, he is a true believer in 1984 as a gospel. So the only open question: how long till O'Keefe is going to start fighting the Reptilian conspiracy?
February 19, 2018
A blow by blow account of the guerrilla tactics & rationale of a start up specialising in sting operations exposing ppl in power. Despite O'Keefe's clarifications, Project Veritas is clearly conservative. That's often used as a slur agnst it, but their exposés are real, not fake
February 1, 2018
Excellent inside look at Project Veritas and the undercover journalism it conducted to bring down ACORN, expose CNN bias, violence at Trump rally's coordinated by the DNC, etc.
December 4, 2020
This might be it, peak sophistry. O'Keefe is either grifting with complete and utter shamelessness or he is possibly suffering some sort of narcissistic, sociopathic disorder that he should get addressed. It's bold move to try and use Chomsky's work to justify you lies but then again O'keefe is a bold dude... Is bold the right word?
I highly recommend watch Timbah On Toast's 4 part series on James O'Keefe:
Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8buQL...
Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJU0k...
Part 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66T-C...
Part 4: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKSTK...
I highly recommend watch Timbah On Toast's 4 part series on James O'Keefe:
Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8buQL...
Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJU0k...
Part 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66T-C...
Part 4: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKSTK...
April 15, 2018
Very informative. Pulls back the covers on DNC shenanigans and progressive tactics with the MSM.
February 6, 2020
Fascinating. The lengths government agencies, media go to to suppress veritas (the truth). I'll be reading more of Mr. O'Keefe's works.
May 29, 2024
James O’Keefe founded and led Project Veritas, a self-described "citizen journalistic organization," until his ouster in 2023. American Pravda, published in 2018, recounted his experiences with "undercover journalism," which aimed to disrupt the American media landscape. Despite its significant subject matter, the book is mediocre in quality.
O’Keefe devotes most of the book to recounting stories from Project Veritas, which aims to capture and reveal unguarded, internal conversations within Democratic Party operations and mainstream media organizations. He details how they infiltrate these "target" organizations using false pretenses and identities, manipulate targets to disclose operational details, and wage Twitter wars to promote and defend their content. While these stories are thrilling to the author, he also uses them to counter claims that their videos are distorted through editing. Nonetheless, the stories remain engaging for the general audience.
O’Keefe claims that Project Veritas has had a significant impact on American political dynamics, but I find little supporting evidence. He exaggerated the impact of his videos on the Clinton campaign's alleged plots to disrupt Trump rallies. He also trumped his story about entrapping a DNC contractor into an illegal vote-harvesting plan, capturing it on tape. O’Keefe asserted that these underground reporting activities influenced the 2016 election results. However, aside from the ousting of several DNC players, his reports have not led to any successful prosecutions, as far as I can tell. Having closely followed the 2016 election through the media, I have no recollection of Project Veritas. The “big successes” O’Keefe boasts about seem to be little more than gaining (predominantly negative) attention on social media and mainstream media.
One of the "busts" highlighted in the book involves a Clinton campaign event where a Canadian citizen attempted to purchase fundraising merchandise, which would constitute a campaign contribution. The campaign staff refused the sale, but a Project Veritas undercover journalist bought the merchandise and was allegedly reimbursed by the Canadian. O'Keefe used this incident to claim a violation of campaign finance law by the Clinton campaign. Regardless of the specifics, this is a minor offense at most. Including such a story in the book underscores the insubstantial nature of O'Keefe's findings.
O’Keefe claims he has no political agenda and focuses on the First Amendment and citizen journalism without delving into partisan politics. He also asserts that Project Veritas staff members hold diverse political views. However, it is puzzling that his sting operations consistently target Democrats and left-leaning organizations. It's possible that only the Left engages in the misconduct he investigates. For instance, perhaps the GOP would never illegally coordinate with nonprofit organizations, as the book accuses Democrats of doing. However, the book does not clarify why he holds this belief. Despite his assertions, it is difficult to perceive him as unbiased.
O’Keefe’s claims of political neutrality are further challenged by his effusive praise for Trump and his pride in the attention Trump pays to him and Project Veritas. To be fair, O’Keefe does not delve into Trump’s political ideals in detail. His admiration for Trump seems to stem from several reasons. First, he identifies with Trump as a challenger to the establishment. Second, he appreciates Trump’s ability to outmaneuver conventional media, which O’Keefe believes has been biased against Trump from the beginning. Third, he enjoys the personal recognition and value Trump places on him. O’Keefe is a Trump ally, but not necessarily a Trump loyalist.
Among the news topics recounted in the book, the one most relevant to readers in 2024 is voter fraud. O’Keefe claimed that Project Veritas uncovered evidence of massive voter fraud in the 2016 elections and earlier. However, the supporting facts are underwhelming. The book documents cases where Project Veritas staffers exploit voting law loopholes by attempting to vote with a false identity or encouraging campaigns to engage in illegal voter-harvesting schemes. These actions do not prove actual crimes occurred.
It is possible, and very easy, to abuse merchandise return policies, yet such abuses are not widespread, and the policies remain reasonable. Similarly, while lax ID requirements may be easy to exploit, large-scale voting fraud does not automatically result from these loopholes. The conservative think tank, the Heritage Foundation, compiled an Election Fraud database as proof of such fraud, but they list fewer than 1,500 cases over the past 40 years across all levels of elections in the U.S., with the vast majority involving fewer than 100 votes.
Voting fraud certainly exists in the U.S., as do many other forms of crime. However, it is far from serious enough to question election legitimacy, and the book has not convinced me otherwise.
The book vividly describes a story where Project Veritas follows a church bus carrying people to voting stations and releases the video on Twitter. Beyond the accusation of voter intimidation, what does this episode actually prove? While admitting it is legal for churches to provide voting transportation, O’Keefe attempts to link this action with cases where priests tell congregants how to vote. Although advocating for a specific political party violates IRS rules for 501(c)(3) organizations, simply finding churches providing transportation adds nothing to his claims. O’Keefe’s efforts to stretch his arguments here reflect a desperate attempt to prove large-scale voter fraud.
Written in 2018, the book does not cover the contentious voting fraud claims of the 2020 election. An Internet search reveals only one case of Project Veritas’ involvement in the 2020 election, where they alleged a Pennsylvania post office mishandled mail-in votes. This claim was retracted after Project Veritas and O’Keefe were sued by the postmaster involved. Therefore, it appears they are still unsuccessful in proving significant voter fraud.
O’Keefe devotes much of the book to criticisms of the mainstream media. These criticisms are both insightful and naive. He argues that while the media rarely tells outright lies, it distorts the truth by selectively reporting facts. He is particularly frustrated when Project Veritas is ignored or "suppressed," as he puts it, by mainstream outlets. His excitement is palpable when Project Veritas manages to "break through" and gain attention from the mainstream media.
O’Keefe also criticizes the mainstream media for their laziness, relying on spokespersons for information instead of conducting their own investigations, such as the undercover work Project Veritas specializes in. Furthermore, he complains about predominantly left-leaning reporters and staff who view journalism as a tool to shape the world according to their own ideologies. These criticisms are common allegations against the media, but "American Pravda" supports them with specific stories and observations.
O’Keefe attributes some of the media’s behavior to corporate pressure and the need for ratings. However, this part of his argument is less convincing.
On the other hand, O’Keefe talks about the “mainstream media” without distinguishing between different outlets. There are well-reputed mainstream media like the New York Times, Washington Post, Fox News, and CNN, each with its own political leanings. There are also more extreme media catering to niche audiences, such as HuffPost and the New York Post. However, to O’Keefe, there are only two types of media: those who report on Project Veritas and those who don’t. This simplistic view undermines his otherwise valuable analyses.
In my view, "American Pravda" fails in its goal of promoting and vindicating Project Veritas. In fact, according to later news reports, Project Veritas ceased operations in late 2023 and is under investigation for the theft of a diary belonging to President Joe Biden’s daughter. However, in addition to the interesting "war stories," the book is valuable in the broader conversation about journalism in the new age.
O’Keefe argues that citizen journalism—people without formal journalistic training and credentials doing reporting—is a legitimate and vital part of our democratic ecosystem. He touts the aphorism “content is king,” meaning that the truth revealed by audio or video recordings is self-evident and does not need the backing of the reporter's credibility. However, in the case of Project Veritas, this is not true because O’Keefe’s interpretations of the videos are often far-stretched. If we are cautious about the interpretations, can we still trust the videos themselves? How do we balance privacy and public accountability when it comes to secret recordings, often made by people using false identities? Should there be well-established ethical standards for this practice?
O’Keefe also believes that social media platforms like Twitter serve as counterbalances to traditional media’s market dominance. He advocates for unrestricted speech on Twitter to ensure that voices like his are not suppressed by those in power. With the additional experience we've gained since the book’s publication in 2018, is unrestricted social media still considered a good idea? These questions, raised by the book, are bigger than Project Veritas and are worth contemplating, even if we dismiss O’Keefe as a right-wing extremist.
In the early days of the Internet, it was believed that it would empower people to participate in politics, especially in news reporting. The credibility of news was based not on the reputation and credentials of the author but on links to supporting materials and on audio/video recordings, which were considered impossible to fake. However, it has become evident that audio/video materials are not always authentic. People can misrepresent the context of a recording, apply undisclosed editing, or engage in blatant fabrication.
The threat of fake audio/video recordings has been amplified by the emergence of AI, which can produce fake material on a larger scale, much more realistically, and at a lower cost. This has eroded public trust in distributed materials, even when they are audio or video. So, does citizen journalism, which depends on the authenticity of audio/video recordings, have a future? Will we return to the traditional media ecosystem, where credentials and reputations play important roles in the trustworthiness of news?
The failure of Project Veritas may provide important lessons on how information is transmitted, received, and evaluated. It raises questions about the sustainability of citizen journalism in an era where the authenticity of audio/video content can no longer be taken for granted. As we grapple with these issues, the importance of traditional media, with its emphasis on credentials and reputations, might see a resurgence.
In conclusion, "American Pravda" offers a contentious and provocative view of the media landscape through the lens of Project Veritas and its founder, James O’Keefe. While the book is rich with intriguing stories and raises critical questions about the role of citizen journalism and media bias, it ultimately falls short in its attempts to substantiate claims of large-scale voter fraud and media corruption. O’Keefe's broad generalizations and failure to distinguish between different media outlets undermine his arguments, and the subsequent controversies surrounding Project Veritas further weaken his case. Nevertheless, the book contributes to the ongoing dialogue about the evolution of journalism in the digital age, highlighting the need for rigorous standards and ethical considerations in reporting. As we navigate an era of increasing misinformation and sophisticated AI-generated content, "American Pravda" serves as a reminder of the challenges we face in maintaining the integrity of our information ecosystem.
O’Keefe devotes most of the book to recounting stories from Project Veritas, which aims to capture and reveal unguarded, internal conversations within Democratic Party operations and mainstream media organizations. He details how they infiltrate these "target" organizations using false pretenses and identities, manipulate targets to disclose operational details, and wage Twitter wars to promote and defend their content. While these stories are thrilling to the author, he also uses them to counter claims that their videos are distorted through editing. Nonetheless, the stories remain engaging for the general audience.
O’Keefe claims that Project Veritas has had a significant impact on American political dynamics, but I find little supporting evidence. He exaggerated the impact of his videos on the Clinton campaign's alleged plots to disrupt Trump rallies. He also trumped his story about entrapping a DNC contractor into an illegal vote-harvesting plan, capturing it on tape. O’Keefe asserted that these underground reporting activities influenced the 2016 election results. However, aside from the ousting of several DNC players, his reports have not led to any successful prosecutions, as far as I can tell. Having closely followed the 2016 election through the media, I have no recollection of Project Veritas. The “big successes” O’Keefe boasts about seem to be little more than gaining (predominantly negative) attention on social media and mainstream media.
One of the "busts" highlighted in the book involves a Clinton campaign event where a Canadian citizen attempted to purchase fundraising merchandise, which would constitute a campaign contribution. The campaign staff refused the sale, but a Project Veritas undercover journalist bought the merchandise and was allegedly reimbursed by the Canadian. O'Keefe used this incident to claim a violation of campaign finance law by the Clinton campaign. Regardless of the specifics, this is a minor offense at most. Including such a story in the book underscores the insubstantial nature of O'Keefe's findings.
O’Keefe claims he has no political agenda and focuses on the First Amendment and citizen journalism without delving into partisan politics. He also asserts that Project Veritas staff members hold diverse political views. However, it is puzzling that his sting operations consistently target Democrats and left-leaning organizations. It's possible that only the Left engages in the misconduct he investigates. For instance, perhaps the GOP would never illegally coordinate with nonprofit organizations, as the book accuses Democrats of doing. However, the book does not clarify why he holds this belief. Despite his assertions, it is difficult to perceive him as unbiased.
O’Keefe’s claims of political neutrality are further challenged by his effusive praise for Trump and his pride in the attention Trump pays to him and Project Veritas. To be fair, O’Keefe does not delve into Trump’s political ideals in detail. His admiration for Trump seems to stem from several reasons. First, he identifies with Trump as a challenger to the establishment. Second, he appreciates Trump’s ability to outmaneuver conventional media, which O’Keefe believes has been biased against Trump from the beginning. Third, he enjoys the personal recognition and value Trump places on him. O’Keefe is a Trump ally, but not necessarily a Trump loyalist.
Among the news topics recounted in the book, the one most relevant to readers in 2024 is voter fraud. O’Keefe claimed that Project Veritas uncovered evidence of massive voter fraud in the 2016 elections and earlier. However, the supporting facts are underwhelming. The book documents cases where Project Veritas staffers exploit voting law loopholes by attempting to vote with a false identity or encouraging campaigns to engage in illegal voter-harvesting schemes. These actions do not prove actual crimes occurred.
It is possible, and very easy, to abuse merchandise return policies, yet such abuses are not widespread, and the policies remain reasonable. Similarly, while lax ID requirements may be easy to exploit, large-scale voting fraud does not automatically result from these loopholes. The conservative think tank, the Heritage Foundation, compiled an Election Fraud database as proof of such fraud, but they list fewer than 1,500 cases over the past 40 years across all levels of elections in the U.S., with the vast majority involving fewer than 100 votes.
Voting fraud certainly exists in the U.S., as do many other forms of crime. However, it is far from serious enough to question election legitimacy, and the book has not convinced me otherwise.
The book vividly describes a story where Project Veritas follows a church bus carrying people to voting stations and releases the video on Twitter. Beyond the accusation of voter intimidation, what does this episode actually prove? While admitting it is legal for churches to provide voting transportation, O’Keefe attempts to link this action with cases where priests tell congregants how to vote. Although advocating for a specific political party violates IRS rules for 501(c)(3) organizations, simply finding churches providing transportation adds nothing to his claims. O’Keefe’s efforts to stretch his arguments here reflect a desperate attempt to prove large-scale voter fraud.
Written in 2018, the book does not cover the contentious voting fraud claims of the 2020 election. An Internet search reveals only one case of Project Veritas’ involvement in the 2020 election, where they alleged a Pennsylvania post office mishandled mail-in votes. This claim was retracted after Project Veritas and O’Keefe were sued by the postmaster involved. Therefore, it appears they are still unsuccessful in proving significant voter fraud.
O’Keefe devotes much of the book to criticisms of the mainstream media. These criticisms are both insightful and naive. He argues that while the media rarely tells outright lies, it distorts the truth by selectively reporting facts. He is particularly frustrated when Project Veritas is ignored or "suppressed," as he puts it, by mainstream outlets. His excitement is palpable when Project Veritas manages to "break through" and gain attention from the mainstream media.
O’Keefe also criticizes the mainstream media for their laziness, relying on spokespersons for information instead of conducting their own investigations, such as the undercover work Project Veritas specializes in. Furthermore, he complains about predominantly left-leaning reporters and staff who view journalism as a tool to shape the world according to their own ideologies. These criticisms are common allegations against the media, but "American Pravda" supports them with specific stories and observations.
O’Keefe attributes some of the media’s behavior to corporate pressure and the need for ratings. However, this part of his argument is less convincing.
On the other hand, O’Keefe talks about the “mainstream media” without distinguishing between different outlets. There are well-reputed mainstream media like the New York Times, Washington Post, Fox News, and CNN, each with its own political leanings. There are also more extreme media catering to niche audiences, such as HuffPost and the New York Post. However, to O’Keefe, there are only two types of media: those who report on Project Veritas and those who don’t. This simplistic view undermines his otherwise valuable analyses.
In my view, "American Pravda" fails in its goal of promoting and vindicating Project Veritas. In fact, according to later news reports, Project Veritas ceased operations in late 2023 and is under investigation for the theft of a diary belonging to President Joe Biden’s daughter. However, in addition to the interesting "war stories," the book is valuable in the broader conversation about journalism in the new age.
O’Keefe argues that citizen journalism—people without formal journalistic training and credentials doing reporting—is a legitimate and vital part of our democratic ecosystem. He touts the aphorism “content is king,” meaning that the truth revealed by audio or video recordings is self-evident and does not need the backing of the reporter's credibility. However, in the case of Project Veritas, this is not true because O’Keefe’s interpretations of the videos are often far-stretched. If we are cautious about the interpretations, can we still trust the videos themselves? How do we balance privacy and public accountability when it comes to secret recordings, often made by people using false identities? Should there be well-established ethical standards for this practice?
O’Keefe also believes that social media platforms like Twitter serve as counterbalances to traditional media’s market dominance. He advocates for unrestricted speech on Twitter to ensure that voices like his are not suppressed by those in power. With the additional experience we've gained since the book’s publication in 2018, is unrestricted social media still considered a good idea? These questions, raised by the book, are bigger than Project Veritas and are worth contemplating, even if we dismiss O’Keefe as a right-wing extremist.
In the early days of the Internet, it was believed that it would empower people to participate in politics, especially in news reporting. The credibility of news was based not on the reputation and credentials of the author but on links to supporting materials and on audio/video recordings, which were considered impossible to fake. However, it has become evident that audio/video materials are not always authentic. People can misrepresent the context of a recording, apply undisclosed editing, or engage in blatant fabrication.
The threat of fake audio/video recordings has been amplified by the emergence of AI, which can produce fake material on a larger scale, much more realistically, and at a lower cost. This has eroded public trust in distributed materials, even when they are audio or video. So, does citizen journalism, which depends on the authenticity of audio/video recordings, have a future? Will we return to the traditional media ecosystem, where credentials and reputations play important roles in the trustworthiness of news?
The failure of Project Veritas may provide important lessons on how information is transmitted, received, and evaluated. It raises questions about the sustainability of citizen journalism in an era where the authenticity of audio/video content can no longer be taken for granted. As we grapple with these issues, the importance of traditional media, with its emphasis on credentials and reputations, might see a resurgence.
In conclusion, "American Pravda" offers a contentious and provocative view of the media landscape through the lens of Project Veritas and its founder, James O’Keefe. While the book is rich with intriguing stories and raises critical questions about the role of citizen journalism and media bias, it ultimately falls short in its attempts to substantiate claims of large-scale voter fraud and media corruption. O’Keefe's broad generalizations and failure to distinguish between different media outlets undermine his arguments, and the subsequent controversies surrounding Project Veritas further weaken his case. Nevertheless, the book contributes to the ongoing dialogue about the evolution of journalism in the digital age, highlighting the need for rigorous standards and ethical considerations in reporting. As we navigate an era of increasing misinformation and sophisticated AI-generated content, "American Pravda" serves as a reminder of the challenges we face in maintaining the integrity of our information ecosystem.
January 25, 2018
Just goes about cataloging the recent escapades of Project Veritas.
I was expecting more insight into modern media/political dynamics and behind the scenes adventures, but it delivered very little original/creative material.
Seems like one of those cashing in on celebrity projects.
I was expecting more insight into modern media/political dynamics and behind the scenes adventures, but it delivered very little original/creative material.
Seems like one of those cashing in on celebrity projects.
March 2, 2024
THE FORMER PROJECT VERITAS PRESIDENT EXPLAINS THEIR METHODOLOGY, AND TOP CASES
James O’Keefe III (who, interestingly, was removed as President in February 2023 for financial improprieties) wrote in the first chapter of this 2017 book, “Trump and I had something in common, not so much a shared ideology as a shared adversary. At Project Veritas, we take no real position on issues beyond free speech and honest government… The adversary we shared … might well be called the deep state-media complex… the deep state could not exist without the media. By exposing the waste, ,fraud, and abuse of the administrative state, we inevitably disrupt the media’s relationship with government and organizations that work with government. Like Trump, Project Veritas is a disruptor. If we have an ideology, it is less ‘conservative’ than anti-statist, anti-status quo.” (Pg. 3)
He continues, “This book will document the transformation in the media, in part through my observations of the world at large and in my part through my own struggles, occasionally brutal, with the forces of media and government… the deep-state media complex and its supporters still have not come to grips with this transformation.” (Pg. 7) He adds, “This book will expose the major media’s decaying ethics and show that the election was an inflection point in media history… To lay the foundation for this journey, I hope to show who we are at Project Veritas and what we do.” (Pg. 9)
He explains, “The mission of Project Veritas is ‘to investigate and expose institutional waste, fraud, abuse and other misconduct in order to create a more ethical and transparent society. This is not inherently a political mission. If our objective were to advance a political agenda, as journalists on both sides have admitted doing, we would have to reinforce that agenda time after time with editorial content. We don’t. We move on. We do not put words in our subjects’ mouths. We cannot create a reality where there is none. If we have any motivation at all, it is to hold the media and administrative state accountable. Not inherently ‘right wing’ or ‘left wing,’ we work the opportunities the major media choose to ignore… The Project Veritas journalist has a profound faith in the power of a free people to make their own decisions regarding what is best for them and their families and, in the process, to create a great, lasting, and moral society. Public policy solutions become self-evident when the people in a democratic republic have access to unfiltered information.” (Pg. 12-13)
He recounts, “The ACORN project… thrust me fully into the limelight… I dressed as a garishly over-the-top pimp, and Hannah dressed as a prostitute. We visited six local ACORN offices … and asked the operatives if they would help us find housing for our stable of underage Central American sex slaves. In every case but one they happily obliged us… We had embarrassed ACORN to be sure, but, more problematically for the statists, we embarrassed the dominant media…. Their reaction to our efforts ran from uneasy to hostile.” (Pg. 21-22)
He observes, “There is no love from the establishment for those of us without credentials, those of us who approach journalism as an ETHICAL ACTIVITY. The deep state-media complex does not trust citizen journalists… It is not just their jobs they are worried about. It is their power… over the flow of money to them, their friends, and their causes… their power over you and me. As a consequence, its agents actively target, harass, and, if need be, use police power and the courts to silence us.” (Pg. 30)
He states, “At Project Veritas, we recruit and train reporters from anywhere—except Washington DC. To get … into the heart of a story, our Veritas reporters become who they need to be. To succeed, they need to be believed. For lessons on how NOT to get burned we have turned to military intelligence… there is much I CANNOT say about how Project Veritas conducts its business… And although we are usually very systematic in what we do, especially in our ‘deep cover’ investigations, sometimes we just stumble into stuff.” (Pg. 60-61) Later, he adds, “Undercover reporting can get at the truth in ways that conventional reporting simply cannot.” (Pg. 127)
He laments, “our journalists do not always have the sense of urgency I might want them to have. They do not always say what I would want them to say. I have to remind myself that they and I are exploring a brave new reportorial world. So much of what we do is improvisational that we rarely have the opportunity to talk strategy on the spot.” (Pg. 131)
When during the 2016 presidential campaign he had video that was embarrassing to the Clinton camp, he recounted, “From [the mass media’s] perspective, no question they might ask would result in a politically useful answer, so better not to ask any questions at all. Here I was with the hottest video in America, one that [Trump] addressed during the debate, one that all the anchors talked about that evening, and the reporters treated me as though I had head lice… the friendly Norwegian guy who interviewed me on the plane… acted as if he did not know me.” (Pg. 183)
He asserts, “This is the reality that journalists face. As the major media corporations consolidate, those who work within those companies, even the best of them like Sinclair and Fox, can expect to see their toughest stories spiked, not because they lack truth but because they have too much of it. Those of us who work outside the major media must stay vigilant lest we become the very people we warn our staffs about…” (Pg. 192) He notes that on social media “I was called a ‘piece of sh-t’] … and was asked to crawl back under my rock… I get this a lot. The thinking is that since I did not go to a journalism school and did not work in a major newsroom, I have no business venturing into the public arena.” (Pg. 199)
After the 2016 election, “the press was in a state of crisis. Its reputation… its power over the people were all at risk. It was the victim of a now undeniable reality: much of the public had given up on the credentialed journalists of the establishment media and were turning to citizen journalists and alternative sites, not just for opinions but for news.” (Pg. 208) He continues, “Since the creation of Project Veritas, the major media have impeded us at almost every step and continue to do so. I have to agree with President Trump that the ‘fake news media’ are not HIS enemy but ‘the enemy of the American People.’ As an enemy, they remain formidable. Their reign will end, I suspect, not with a bang and not with a whimper but with a tantrum.” (Pg. 213)
He notes, “As a nonprofit, Project Veritas does not have to worry about its shareholders the way ABC and CBS did. Unlike those networks, we have literally millions of Americans behind us who believe in our mission. We do not see these people as customers. We see them as compatriots, and we are no more likely to roll over than they are.” (Pg. 218-219) He adds, “the media have almost inevitably attacked us. Our crime was undermining their narrative and embarrassing them.” (Pg. 220)
He states, “To rationalize the humiliation of the deep-state-media complex, the New York Times … accused the Trump camp of ‘fake news’… as a way of explaining a reality that defied them… I could not begin to count the number of times our work product at Project Veritas has been called ‘fake’ or ‘false’ or ‘fraudulent’ or ‘discredited.’ Always defiant Donald Trump turned the phrase back on the media. He focused particularly on CNN, and once he did, the use of the term by people on the right exploded. The major media proved vulnerable to the accusation if for no other reason than that they create the vast majority of new stories… The most dangerous news stories are those with at least some basis in truth and generated by people or institutions with some credibility.” (Pg. 242-243)
He summarizes, “As of this writing, the … totalitarians on the left still had their hands on the levers of media power, and now they were angry to boot. They could tweak their algorithms to keep us from trending on their social media sites. They could render critical words as ‘hate speech’ and block discussions on those subjects. They could and did … assure their own partisans that everything we said or did had been ‘discredited.’ Long trained to ignore alternative sources, the partisans, more often than not, chose to accept uncritically their side’s version of the truth, their ‘Pravda.’” (Pg. 253)
He concludes, “At Project Veritas, we wake up every morning with the humble and profound realization that the whole system---media, legal, political---is lined up against us. As much as I enjoy the battle, I wish it were otherwise… In a media universe crowded with opinion and conjecture, we offer the unguarded words of those on whom we report and just enough commentary to put those words in context. The way forward for us is not to get covered by the media but to become the media…As long as I have the privilege of being allowed to share the truth with the American people, we will stick to our guiding philosophy.” (Pg. 276-277)
O’Keefe left Project Veritas (which has since lost a lots of its social media ‘followers’) under bad terms; but this book provides a lot of insights into how they operated.
James O’Keefe III (who, interestingly, was removed as President in February 2023 for financial improprieties) wrote in the first chapter of this 2017 book, “Trump and I had something in common, not so much a shared ideology as a shared adversary. At Project Veritas, we take no real position on issues beyond free speech and honest government… The adversary we shared … might well be called the deep state-media complex… the deep state could not exist without the media. By exposing the waste, ,fraud, and abuse of the administrative state, we inevitably disrupt the media’s relationship with government and organizations that work with government. Like Trump, Project Veritas is a disruptor. If we have an ideology, it is less ‘conservative’ than anti-statist, anti-status quo.” (Pg. 3)
He continues, “This book will document the transformation in the media, in part through my observations of the world at large and in my part through my own struggles, occasionally brutal, with the forces of media and government… the deep-state media complex and its supporters still have not come to grips with this transformation.” (Pg. 7) He adds, “This book will expose the major media’s decaying ethics and show that the election was an inflection point in media history… To lay the foundation for this journey, I hope to show who we are at Project Veritas and what we do.” (Pg. 9)
He explains, “The mission of Project Veritas is ‘to investigate and expose institutional waste, fraud, abuse and other misconduct in order to create a more ethical and transparent society. This is not inherently a political mission. If our objective were to advance a political agenda, as journalists on both sides have admitted doing, we would have to reinforce that agenda time after time with editorial content. We don’t. We move on. We do not put words in our subjects’ mouths. We cannot create a reality where there is none. If we have any motivation at all, it is to hold the media and administrative state accountable. Not inherently ‘right wing’ or ‘left wing,’ we work the opportunities the major media choose to ignore… The Project Veritas journalist has a profound faith in the power of a free people to make their own decisions regarding what is best for them and their families and, in the process, to create a great, lasting, and moral society. Public policy solutions become self-evident when the people in a democratic republic have access to unfiltered information.” (Pg. 12-13)
He recounts, “The ACORN project… thrust me fully into the limelight… I dressed as a garishly over-the-top pimp, and Hannah dressed as a prostitute. We visited six local ACORN offices … and asked the operatives if they would help us find housing for our stable of underage Central American sex slaves. In every case but one they happily obliged us… We had embarrassed ACORN to be sure, but, more problematically for the statists, we embarrassed the dominant media…. Their reaction to our efforts ran from uneasy to hostile.” (Pg. 21-22)
He observes, “There is no love from the establishment for those of us without credentials, those of us who approach journalism as an ETHICAL ACTIVITY. The deep state-media complex does not trust citizen journalists… It is not just their jobs they are worried about. It is their power… over the flow of money to them, their friends, and their causes… their power over you and me. As a consequence, its agents actively target, harass, and, if need be, use police power and the courts to silence us.” (Pg. 30)
He states, “At Project Veritas, we recruit and train reporters from anywhere—except Washington DC. To get … into the heart of a story, our Veritas reporters become who they need to be. To succeed, they need to be believed. For lessons on how NOT to get burned we have turned to military intelligence… there is much I CANNOT say about how Project Veritas conducts its business… And although we are usually very systematic in what we do, especially in our ‘deep cover’ investigations, sometimes we just stumble into stuff.” (Pg. 60-61) Later, he adds, “Undercover reporting can get at the truth in ways that conventional reporting simply cannot.” (Pg. 127)
He laments, “our journalists do not always have the sense of urgency I might want them to have. They do not always say what I would want them to say. I have to remind myself that they and I are exploring a brave new reportorial world. So much of what we do is improvisational that we rarely have the opportunity to talk strategy on the spot.” (Pg. 131)
When during the 2016 presidential campaign he had video that was embarrassing to the Clinton camp, he recounted, “From [the mass media’s] perspective, no question they might ask would result in a politically useful answer, so better not to ask any questions at all. Here I was with the hottest video in America, one that [Trump] addressed during the debate, one that all the anchors talked about that evening, and the reporters treated me as though I had head lice… the friendly Norwegian guy who interviewed me on the plane… acted as if he did not know me.” (Pg. 183)
He asserts, “This is the reality that journalists face. As the major media corporations consolidate, those who work within those companies, even the best of them like Sinclair and Fox, can expect to see their toughest stories spiked, not because they lack truth but because they have too much of it. Those of us who work outside the major media must stay vigilant lest we become the very people we warn our staffs about…” (Pg. 192) He notes that on social media “I was called a ‘piece of sh-t’] … and was asked to crawl back under my rock… I get this a lot. The thinking is that since I did not go to a journalism school and did not work in a major newsroom, I have no business venturing into the public arena.” (Pg. 199)
After the 2016 election, “the press was in a state of crisis. Its reputation… its power over the people were all at risk. It was the victim of a now undeniable reality: much of the public had given up on the credentialed journalists of the establishment media and were turning to citizen journalists and alternative sites, not just for opinions but for news.” (Pg. 208) He continues, “Since the creation of Project Veritas, the major media have impeded us at almost every step and continue to do so. I have to agree with President Trump that the ‘fake news media’ are not HIS enemy but ‘the enemy of the American People.’ As an enemy, they remain formidable. Their reign will end, I suspect, not with a bang and not with a whimper but with a tantrum.” (Pg. 213)
He notes, “As a nonprofit, Project Veritas does not have to worry about its shareholders the way ABC and CBS did. Unlike those networks, we have literally millions of Americans behind us who believe in our mission. We do not see these people as customers. We see them as compatriots, and we are no more likely to roll over than they are.” (Pg. 218-219) He adds, “the media have almost inevitably attacked us. Our crime was undermining their narrative and embarrassing them.” (Pg. 220)
He states, “To rationalize the humiliation of the deep-state-media complex, the New York Times … accused the Trump camp of ‘fake news’… as a way of explaining a reality that defied them… I could not begin to count the number of times our work product at Project Veritas has been called ‘fake’ or ‘false’ or ‘fraudulent’ or ‘discredited.’ Always defiant Donald Trump turned the phrase back on the media. He focused particularly on CNN, and once he did, the use of the term by people on the right exploded. The major media proved vulnerable to the accusation if for no other reason than that they create the vast majority of new stories… The most dangerous news stories are those with at least some basis in truth and generated by people or institutions with some credibility.” (Pg. 242-243)
He summarizes, “As of this writing, the … totalitarians on the left still had their hands on the levers of media power, and now they were angry to boot. They could tweak their algorithms to keep us from trending on their social media sites. They could render critical words as ‘hate speech’ and block discussions on those subjects. They could and did … assure their own partisans that everything we said or did had been ‘discredited.’ Long trained to ignore alternative sources, the partisans, more often than not, chose to accept uncritically their side’s version of the truth, their ‘Pravda.’” (Pg. 253)
He concludes, “At Project Veritas, we wake up every morning with the humble and profound realization that the whole system---media, legal, political---is lined up against us. As much as I enjoy the battle, I wish it were otherwise… In a media universe crowded with opinion and conjecture, we offer the unguarded words of those on whom we report and just enough commentary to put those words in context. The way forward for us is not to get covered by the media but to become the media…As long as I have the privilege of being allowed to share the truth with the American people, we will stick to our guiding philosophy.” (Pg. 276-277)
O’Keefe left Project Veritas (which has since lost a lots of its social media ‘followers’) under bad terms; but this book provides a lot of insights into how they operated.
March 6, 2018
Mr. O'Keefe is a little full of himself, but I agree that verifiable independent journalism is vital (as opposed to tin-foil hat conspiracy theorists that have a YouTube channel), so I value what he does as long as his organization maintains its integrity. As a progressive I will point out that Mr. O'Keefe's overlabored assurances that he and his organization are non-partisan doesn't ring true when he only does "investigations" of liberal institutions. I think most rational people understand that the B.S. runs wide and deep on both side of the political spectrum, neither have a monopoly on virtue, mom and apple pie, and both sides feel that all measures are justified because everyone is doing it.
February 18, 2018
A look into corruption. True journalism. A look at the stagnant news stations and what it really takes to make a difference in a corrupt world. Now I have to let my friends and family borrow it because they saw me reading it and when I told them about James crossing the border dressed as Osama bin laden they laughed with me. Great work, James. /huggles.
March 15, 2018
I give this four stars simply for the exposure of the media bias which seems to be endemic to the industry. In my opinion, not enough light can be shone on the lack of objectivity in the mainstream media today. Their job as the fourth estate---speaking truth to power, holding accountable our elected officials, meting out corruption where it can be found---seems to have been willingly relinquished and discarded by them a long time ago. Instead of being the tool for maintaining the freedom of our republic, they have become the means by which it's become corrupted. A free and open press is the last bulwark against a tyranical government and the resultant loss of our freedoms. To those who would balk at the notion of questioning the ethics of our press, I would say that you willingly give up your right to be trusted when you dispose of an objective pursuit of truth in favor of a narrative that supports your own personal agenda. James O'keefe is right and has every reason to call you on the carpet when you give up your civic duty.
I was hoping for more examples of media corruption and bias in general terms, outside of his experience at Project Veritas. As it is, this is more of a memoir of O'keefe's personal experience as the originator of Project Veritas and the successes they've had to-date in exposing the mainstream media. But the accounts given are powerful exposé's of the hypocrisy of the left. In each instance, we're given detailed descriptions of these sting operations accompanied by his incisive commentary, just in case you were to miss these glaring contradictions.
O'keefe walks us through his accounts with the Left's playmakers and leaves you sometimes in disbelief at the confessions he and his team are able to draw out of the unsuspecting. People are never as honest as when they think no one is watching. I suppose that's what O'keefe provides; an open forum to spill their guts and, in the process, reveal the schemes that would never otherwise come to light. His kind of journalism is unique, but sometimes it's the only way to get to the bottom of a story. And in a fight where the other side owns most of the weapons of warfare---the media, entertainment, higher education---somebody needs to level the playing field. And that's essentially what his team does. If you're yearning to see somebody who has the courage to push back on the liberal and politically correct assault on our culture which has gone largely unchecked for so long, then read this book. It gives you a sense that all is not lost and that there's hope in reclaiming some of what we've lost as a society. The book title tells it all; he named the book 'American Pravda' after the Soviet propaganda newspaper which only reported lies supporting the statist agenda and whatever they wanted the public to believe. He admits that while the soviet populace were being fed lies, they at least knew that they were lies. Unfortunately, here, a large portion of the public believe what they're being told. While aptly titled, the one advantage we have is that we aren't forced to believe what we're being told. We have the freedom to make up our own minds. And thinking for ourselves may be the greatest enemy to the liberal agenda and the most cleansing tonic for exposing the lies that pop up in whatever medium they happen to own.
I was hoping for more examples of media corruption and bias in general terms, outside of his experience at Project Veritas. As it is, this is more of a memoir of O'keefe's personal experience as the originator of Project Veritas and the successes they've had to-date in exposing the mainstream media. But the accounts given are powerful exposé's of the hypocrisy of the left. In each instance, we're given detailed descriptions of these sting operations accompanied by his incisive commentary, just in case you were to miss these glaring contradictions.
O'keefe walks us through his accounts with the Left's playmakers and leaves you sometimes in disbelief at the confessions he and his team are able to draw out of the unsuspecting. People are never as honest as when they think no one is watching. I suppose that's what O'keefe provides; an open forum to spill their guts and, in the process, reveal the schemes that would never otherwise come to light. His kind of journalism is unique, but sometimes it's the only way to get to the bottom of a story. And in a fight where the other side owns most of the weapons of warfare---the media, entertainment, higher education---somebody needs to level the playing field. And that's essentially what his team does. If you're yearning to see somebody who has the courage to push back on the liberal and politically correct assault on our culture which has gone largely unchecked for so long, then read this book. It gives you a sense that all is not lost and that there's hope in reclaiming some of what we've lost as a society. The book title tells it all; he named the book 'American Pravda' after the Soviet propaganda newspaper which only reported lies supporting the statist agenda and whatever they wanted the public to believe. He admits that while the soviet populace were being fed lies, they at least knew that they were lies. Unfortunately, here, a large portion of the public believe what they're being told. While aptly titled, the one advantage we have is that we aren't forced to believe what we're being told. We have the freedom to make up our own minds. And thinking for ourselves may be the greatest enemy to the liberal agenda and the most cleansing tonic for exposing the lies that pop up in whatever medium they happen to own.
May 12, 2018
I finished the audio book written and narrated by James O'Keefe. It was excellent.
American Pravda: My Fight for Truth in the Era of Fake News
by James O'Keefe
4.49 · Rating details · 114 Ratings · 21 Reviews
The one real difference between the American press and the Soviet state newspaper Pravda was that the Russian people knew they were being lied to. To expose the lies our media tell us today, controversial journalist James O’Keefe created Project Veritas, an independent news organization whose reporters go where traditional journalists dare not. Their investigative work–equal parts James Bond, Mike Wallace, and Saul Alinsky—has had a consistent and powerful impact on its targets.
In American Pravda, the reader is invited to go undercover with these intrepid journalists as they infiltrate political campaigns, unmask dishonest officials and expose voter fraud. A rollicking adventure story on one level, the book also serves as a treatise on modern media, arguing that establishment journalists have a vested interest in keeping the powerful comfortable and the people misinformed.
The book not only contests the false narratives frequently put forth by corporate media, it documents the consequences of telling the truth in a world that does not necessarily want to hear it. O’Keefe’s enemies attack with lawsuits, smear campaigns, political prosecutions, and false charges in an effort to shut down Project Veritas. For O’Keefe, every one of these attacks is a sign of success.
American Pravda puts the myths and misconceptions surrounding O’Keefe’s activities to rest and will make you rethink every word you hear and read in the so-called mainstream press.
American Pravda: My Fight for Truth in the Era of Fake News
by James O'Keefe
4.49 · Rating details · 114 Ratings · 21 Reviews
The one real difference between the American press and the Soviet state newspaper Pravda was that the Russian people knew they were being lied to. To expose the lies our media tell us today, controversial journalist James O’Keefe created Project Veritas, an independent news organization whose reporters go where traditional journalists dare not. Their investigative work–equal parts James Bond, Mike Wallace, and Saul Alinsky—has had a consistent and powerful impact on its targets.
In American Pravda, the reader is invited to go undercover with these intrepid journalists as they infiltrate political campaigns, unmask dishonest officials and expose voter fraud. A rollicking adventure story on one level, the book also serves as a treatise on modern media, arguing that establishment journalists have a vested interest in keeping the powerful comfortable and the people misinformed.
The book not only contests the false narratives frequently put forth by corporate media, it documents the consequences of telling the truth in a world that does not necessarily want to hear it. O’Keefe’s enemies attack with lawsuits, smear campaigns, political prosecutions, and false charges in an effort to shut down Project Veritas. For O’Keefe, every one of these attacks is a sign of success.
American Pravda puts the myths and misconceptions surrounding O’Keefe’s activities to rest and will make you rethink every word you hear and read in the so-called mainstream press.
October 15, 2021
To anyone who believes the media is telling the truth even 5% of the time, you should read this book. Very interesting investigations. Okeefe is very articulate and smart in his telling of his investigative reporting, but what really stands out is the blatant disregard of main stream media outlets to the legitimacy of his undercover videos. Case in point, the media is so willing to write his tactics off as misleading (seriously, google the guy and see what Wikipedia says about him… spoiler, it’s dismissive) when they themselves will use videos that go along with their own left leaning political agenda exhaustively (think the billy bush trump audio recording). The hypocrisy is astounding but only idiots (or liberals) will not see this.
Even tho this book was written in 2017 (he has a new one coming out in Jan 2022!) it is still relevant today if you look at the great extents the media (Fakebook, Twitter blah blah blah) have gone through to suppress anything that goes against the left wing ideology, most notably all the suppression of negative vaccine reactions, and you will have your answer to the question Marcus Luttrell asked as to who the real enemy of our country is, right here, the media.
Even tho this book was written in 2017 (he has a new one coming out in Jan 2022!) it is still relevant today if you look at the great extents the media (Fakebook, Twitter blah blah blah) have gone through to suppress anything that goes against the left wing ideology, most notably all the suppression of negative vaccine reactions, and you will have your answer to the question Marcus Luttrell asked as to who the real enemy of our country is, right here, the media.
July 9, 2018
The boring, vanilla flavor of this book stands in stark contrast to the exciting, bold, undercover journalism of Project Veritas. I like Project Veritas which prompted me to read this book. But James O'Keefe comes off as a self-aggrandizing jerk. It's one thing to be proud of your work, it's another thing to to be conceited and O'Keefe's arrogance pours from the pages. While Project Veritas exposes the truth behind corrupt organizations, this book exposed the truth of who James O'Keefe is - a pompous jerk.
March 1, 2021
I enjoyed the narrative though felt that o'keefe did a lot of patting on his back. For being an unbiased person he sure seems biased. I looked up his stuff on the website and read both sides of the reporting. On the whole acorn thing and voter fraud. I support his efforts thought there something that just tried me off.
I get that he is proud of all the things he has done but I was expecting more facts, more substance to his data/evidence.
I get that he is proud of all the things he has done but I was expecting more facts, more substance to his data/evidence.
March 26, 2021
A phrase that is often used but certainly fits, "Thanks for your service." You (James) and your staff are taking the battle for our country to the people. Most of the media is working against our country and the things we were founded on but your team is exposing the truth. Again, thank you. I highly recommend this book for those with an open mind. It exposes the hypocrisy of the media elite and the corruption within our government. Keep up the good work!
March 16, 2018
I love James O'Keefe and what he does with Project Veritas ; exposing corruption. Unfortunately, those undercover video busts just don't translate to the written word all that well.
However, if you're unfamiliar with his (and Project Veritas') work, I do recommend reading this book. The light he shines on some things may surprise you.
However, if you're unfamiliar with his (and Project Veritas') work, I do recommend reading this book. The light he shines on some things may surprise you.
July 5, 2018
O’Keefe memorializes why Project Veritas does it’s work as a new media outlet. Journalism v page views, clicks and ratings are discussed as he describes his efforts to get a contrary message out to the masses.
February 25, 2020
Extremely entertaining read, which surprised me as I anticipated having to force myself through this. Depressing too since the book reveals just how far the fourth estate has fallen. “Journalism” is joke. Video doesn’t lie.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews