SourceFed Misleads Viewers Regarding Richard Dawkins

Response to:

When Philip DeFranco's news channel, SourceFed, reported on an incident regarding Professor Richard Dawkins at an airport terminal in Edinburgh, their reporting was very misleading, especially given that their source came across as more of a gossip column instead of a report. Regardless of whether they were trying to be comical, they were factually erroneous in several aspects which I discuss in this video.

Note: All clips are used under FAIR USE for commentary/criticism, and is covered under section 107 of copyright law.


SourceFed's source for the video:
The Independent - "'Bin Laden has won, they confiscated my honey': Outspoken academic Richard Dawkins in airline security Twitter row over jar of honey"

Professor Dawkins' article in The Guardian regarding the incident:
"My honey trap: why doesn't anyone believe in public-spirited concern?"

Professor Dawkins' previous article relating to airport security written back in 2011:
Prospect Magazine - "If I ruled the world"

LiveLife8072's video correcting SourceFed - "SourceFed Hates Dawkins & Atheism?"

"The 10 Commandments For Atheists?!" - a SourceFed video which Elliott Morgan hosted himself (credit to LiveLife8072 for pointing this out in his video):

Tags: Richard Dawkins Claims "Bin Laden has won" Over Confiscated Honey, Richard Dawkins, SourceFed, Elliott Morgan, Joe Bereta, Dawkins, Dawkins airport, airport security, airport TSA, TSA, NSA, Dawkins honey, misleading reporting, news, twitter, Dawkins twitter, atheism, atheist, not funny, not humorous, The Guardian, The Atlantic, Dawkins Bin Laden, religion, EducationIsCool, fact-checking, Elliott Morgan wrong, Elliott Morgan incorrect, SourceFed wrong, SourceFed incorrect, SourceFed misleading, SourceFed misleads, news, politics

Comment by Ward Cressin on November 7, 2013 at 2:27pm

Thank you for mentioning the stupid video by SourceFed which lead me to Alain de Botton's 10 virtues for atheists more clearly listed here:

I made sure to downvote SourceFed's Dawkins video you replied to above after watching it and seeing that it was even a bit worse than what you indicated.

Comment by kris feenstra on November 7, 2013 at 11:39pm

"...for writing books..."

I get they are pandering to the truncated attentions spans of modern media consumers, but it's odd to think they aren't embarrassed for this joke. Making fun of Dawkins for the honey thing isn't so bad. It's clear these guys are just a form of light entertainment, and the way Dawkins phrased his tweet was odd.

Twitter is a specific venue for communication which emphasizes brevity, so some of the blame falls on Dawkins for not expressing his idea more clearly in the given format. The fallout is people taking potshots. I won't say the hosts are beyond reproach. Their shallow program does seem to distort the truth, but from what I can see, they are pretty transparent about their own low standards and taking the low hanging fruit. Are they really trying to be taken seriously by anyone? I'd like to think they aren't.

Comment by Diane on November 8, 2013 at 6:38am

@ ASJ  I think atheists, or anybody for that matter, would do well to adopt good habits, period.  Which habits do you think atheists would do well to adopt?  How do you propose we learn about them and practice them without becoming Christian in the process.  How do you suggest we operationalize the acquiring of these habits?  Don't all religions have at least one habit we would do well to emulate?  What makes Christianity different?  And, finally, how do you know that there aren't atheists who have adopted the very habits of which you speak?

Comment by Simon Paynton on November 8, 2013 at 7:05am

AS<J :  Alain de Botton a Christian?  Never.  I am a huge fan of his.  He's like the Anti-Dawkins. 

I have some TV programmes he made about different philosophers







Comment by Simon Paynton on November 8, 2013 at 7:09am

@Diane - I'm just in the process of producing an "atheist bible" for want of a better description. 

It consists of some central ideas which successfully explain and take the place that God and morality hold in a normal religion.  From those central ideas, all the virtues flow. 

So it's really a user's guide to morality.  An easy, elegant way to learn about and apply morality.  It goes all the way to enlightenment, redefining Buddhism. 

Not everyone feels the need to be moral.  But in 10 years' time, when their life is all washed up from years of immorality, they will want to know. 

The central ideas are pristine, however the rest is a bit raggedy.  I'm going to tidy up what I've got and then try and get Alain de Botton's staff interested, and if they like it, maybe the great man himself would like to take it over, since it's the holy grail of philosophy since the dawn of time. 

Comment by Diane on November 8, 2013 at 7:13am

@ Simon.  Well good luck with that.

I feel rather like I know how to be moral without needing a reference book of any kind.  

Comment by Simon Paynton on November 8, 2013 at 7:17am

This is great, Diane, but not everyone does.  Some people need guidance.  I use this new formula myself in tricky situations, it might not be the easiest option personally but it's the one which works the best and gives the best outcome in my experience.  However, theory and experience are two different things and I still make mistakes through lack of experience. 

Comment by Simon Paynton on November 8, 2013 at 8:39am

AS<J and Diane - I'd be very interested in that.  These are things I've been thinking about.  If there's no God, what do people worship?  We worship the same thing Jesus worshiped.  What do Buddhists worship?  Compassion and tidy living, it seems.  A way of life and everyday habits. 

Comment by Simon Paynton on November 8, 2013 at 5:40pm

@ AS<J, Diane:  Here is a [quite long] list I've put together, it's really just dashed off. 

Strength, humility, compassion, integrity - these are the essential qualities, the basis for all the rest.  
Truth and compassion.  
Good faith
Good naturedness
Finding a way through
Allowing yourself and others to make mistakes
Trying again
High quality
Independence of mind
Connecting with what’s real
Willingness to change yourself
Willingness to be honest with yourself
Accepting someone despite their faults

Comment by kris feenstra on November 8, 2013 at 10:00pm

I didnt think atheists needed a guide. I though that atheists could just get by with logic and reason. Why do they want to be guided by a list? 

"They" don't as a class of people. I am sure some would find it nice to have a set as a point of commonality with other atheists. I have not yet ever seen a list (of ten or any other number) with which I was in total agreement.

Jesus owns empathy. Religion owns empathy. Thats why Jesus is the best invention ever because whether atheists accept it or not, empathy is being modeled off Jesus. Theres nothing that empathy does that Jesus doesnt.

Jesus set a standard so harsh that no one could possibly live up to it (live by the Law and the Prophets to the letter), then ended up set apart as the mythological paragon to which we should all be held to account, all because he paid a relatively modest price in a temporary state of being. This is the antithesis of empathy. It's cruelty and hubris.


You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist


Blog Posts


Posted by ɐuɐz ǝllǝıuɐp on July 28, 2014 at 10:27pm 0 Comments

Services we love

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by Dan.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service