Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

A question for the press corps about Breitbart

Less than two months ago, Andrew Breitbart was seen as such an important media figure that he merited a huge profile in The New Yorker magazine. He has been widely quoted by major news organizations on a whole host of topics and has received a great deal of press attention for his various pet crusades.

So here's my question: Has any news org done a stand-alone story on the damage the Shirley Sherrod mess has done -- or should do -- to his credibility?

Have any high profile traditional media figures come right out and said that Breitbart -- who admitted flat out that he received the Sherrod video unedited and posted it without tracking down the orignal -- has dealt himself a severe blow here?

These are sincere questions. How much of this have you all seen? Maybe I'm missing something, but I haven't seem much of it at all. Why not? News orgs love "winners and losers" stories. Reporters and editors love to talk about other media figures. It seems like a no-brainer that this would be the next angle on this story.

So why aren't we seeing more along these lines?

UPDATE, 12:54: The White House press secretary calls on the media to do some soul searching about its own role in this mess.

By Greg Sargent  |  July 22, 2010; 10:56 AM ET
Categories:  Political media  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Morning Plum
Next: Sharron Angle still taking cash raised by ostracized Tea Party leader?

Comments

I think if you go back over the last day and a half, lms, you'll find an extraordinary amount of outraged Obama-bashing by yourself and others. Greg too focused almost all his outrage on the White House staff and Vilsack. Really, go back and look.

Posted by: TomBlue | July 22, 2010 10:26 AM

.................

The Right Wing we expect to keep attacking President Obama, like a pack of rabid dogs. Now we have the left doing the very same thing to him.

He said before: "I screwed up. It was not the first time, and it will not be the last time" The Lunatic Left will make sure that Republicans will be back in control soon.

Just Eighteen months into a 48 Month first, and probably only term, how is President Obama doing?


Stopped the economic meltdown, caused by The Republican policies, that they want to return to.

Passed the most important Wall St Casino Banks regulations bill, since The Republicans" Earlier Great Depression.

Passed a history making National Health Care Reform bill, where several other Presidents had failed.

Adding Two Women to The Supreme Court, setting a record of three, that will now be on it, at the same time.

Passed the Lily Ledbetter, equal pay, for equal work law.

Negotiated a new START treaty with Russia.

Has made a large down payment on an effort to establish a green energy domestic production economy.

Has most of the world looking up to the President Of The USA, instead of despising him.

Of course, since he does not walk on water all the time, then the Lunatic Left will destroy him. That is how they opperate.

No one stopped to even think that he probably got rushed into letting the woman go, because of the prior experience of having the Rev. Wright Tapes being used against him, over and over. The NAACP called for the woman to be fired. What was President Obama supposed to do. Drop everything, and tell David Cameron; I will get to you later; because I have to devote all my time into micromanaging a minor personnel staffing situation.
The prolonged use of the Rev. Wright Tapes,
probably led the White House to make a rushed decision, in order to avoid the same thing happening in this case.

He screwed up on this particular decision. He is not perfect.

Look at all the major things he has accomplished in just his first year and a half.

The Republicans will be back in power soon, and will reverse much of what he has accomplished.

The Lunatic Left, that is already talking about not voting, the next time around, will make sure that happens.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 22, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

"So here's my question: Has any news org done a stand-alone story on the damage the Shirley Sherrod mess has done -- or should do -- to his credibility?"

I'm astounded, Greg, that you would ask this when you don't care a whit about the way the various Journolist quotes have damaged the credibility of Klein, Ackerman, and so on.

Posted by: sbj3 | July 22, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Liam, I thought I gave the WH a lot of credit for apologizing to Sherrod. And I've also written a fair amount about Obama's accomplishments.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 22, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse

"How much of this have you all seen?"

NONE.

"So why aren't we seeing more along these lines?"

Because everyone was so focused on the WH/Vilsack apology.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 22, 2010 11:08 AM | Report abuse

I'm reposting a comment I just made on the morning thread:

Greg hits on the key question:

"Why can't we simultaneously go after Breitbart/Fox's role here while ALSO blaming the White House for being too willing to let Breitbart set their agenda?"

The reason you cannot go after both is because going after the WH for their response undermines the idea that Breitbart/Fox did something wrong in the first place.

We have seen this unfold as the VAST majority of reporting after the fact is about the WH apology.

The correct response is to pin the problem on the perpetrators FIRST and attack their core competence. Then deal with residual issues related to the response.

And I understand that the motivation in demanding that the WH/Vilsack address the situation because it is the quickest path to justice for Shirley Sherrod. I get that and I appreciate it. But in a story like this it is actually MORE IMPORTANT to nail the perpetrators first. And to do that, THEY need to be the focus of the reporting, not the reaction to their actions.

The story will fade, people will forget, and all people will remember is that the WH apologized for some personnel issue at USDA, rather than the fact that there was an intentional, coordinated effort to use race to attack the President while smearing a black government official. I'd love to be wrong, but I doubt I am, especially now that I've seen the Day 3 headlines in the msm.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 22, 2010 11:08 AM | Report abuse

sbj, why are attempting to paint Greg with the "journolist brush" when he wasn't part of the group?

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 22, 2010 11:09 AM | Report abuse

"So why aren't we seeing more along these lines?"

Sigh. You must be kidding. Or is this a rhetorical question?

Why? Because the only journalists that aren't scared silly of accusations of "liberal bias" are rightwing meat-wads of the Fox News variety.

America's journalists need to spend less time preening and applying make up and more time growing a functioning set of testicles.


Posted by: nisleib | July 22, 2010 11:10 AM | Report abuse

@Greg

"So why aren't we seeing more along these lines?"

Because the DC press corp protects their own, plus they are afraid of FOX pulling a Sherrod/VanJones/ACORN on them if they speak out.

"Journalism" in DC has turned into a bunch of school children, all just trying to sit at the cool kids table and hoping that if they are nice to the bully he'll leave them alone and beat someone else up.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | July 22, 2010 11:13 AM | Report abuse

"I thought I gave the WH a lot of credit for apologizing to Sherrod. And I've also written a fair amount about Obama's accomplishments."

You did and you have Greg. You should be commended for your coverage of the WH angle of this story, among many other stories. I just think, as I've made abundantly clear, that the choice to focus on the WH, rather than the bigger picture of the racist right tactics, was a mistake. In that you were far from alone, which is troubling. The Left, finally and once and for all, needs to learn the lesson that you need to hit back immediately and hard at the core competence of the perpetrators of this type of attack.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 22, 2010 11:13 AM | Report abuse

I watch some of those media interviews of this Breibart Creature.

The Guy is scary good at what he does. He is an Evil Propagandist who happens to be very good at it.

Of course the MSM, and the chest thumbing blogerskites are so timid and inept, that they make it easy for him to sell his big lies.


I watched the clip of him being interviewed on ABC yesterday morning.

He was not pushed to explain how he came by the tape; and who edited it. Never was asked the most pertinent question.

Breibert claims that he was given the video clip in the form that he posted it. He claimed that he did not doctor it.

The MSM appears to have no interest in even asking him; Who gave it to you, in that Doctored condition.

There are no real reporters left, and the bloggers are even worse, because all they do is spend entire days salivating over news gnats, and ignoring the really big stories.

I should correct that to say there are a handful of real reporters still doing great reporting for McClatchy; and the wonderful Dana Priest does fine work for the Washington Post.

She put three years digging into the Massive Intelligence Gathering Monster that was created by Bush/Cheney. It is totally dysfunctional, and wastes massive amounts of money.

Ms. Priest may win a Pulitzer for her reporting on this subject, but she sure did not get much attention from even those who run blogs on her own paper.

They have far more minor stories to go all TMZ about.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 22, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

@suekzoo1

Because sbj is still in crybaby mode, since Greg refuses to stop reporting on Sharron Angle? So now it's simply attacks Greg's credibility.

Speaking of Sharron Angle...here's a fantastic clip of her at a "press conference" where she gives a 3 min. speech, then takes no questions:

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/angle-holds-press-conference-takes-no-questions-and-leaves-video.php

It's funny. The guy speaking actually invites the press to ask questions, and a reporter even grabs a mic from the podium to pass around to the press so they can ask.

Angle turns tail and bolts out the back door. Haha.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | July 22, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

Top 3 stories on WaPo Politics homepage:

FOX News not to blame for Sherrod firing

"""For all the chatter that Sherrod was done in by Fox News, the network didn't touch the story until her forced resignation was made public Monday evening."""

Sherrod: I want to talk to Obama

""""I can't say that the president is fully behind me," Sherrod said Thursday morning."""

Scandal tarnishes White House

"""There was no composure or fortitude on display in responding to the video of Shirley Sherrod."""

WaPo = Truly. Shameful.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 22, 2010 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Ethan, "The Left, finally and once and for all, needs to learn the lesson that you need to hit back immediately and hard at the core competence of the perpetrators of this type of attack."

Ya know, Ethan, in a way you are totally correct, and I agree generally that's the way to go. Why it was hard for me to do THIS TIME was because the immediate response from the administration (Vilsack) was to double down on their decision to fire Shirley, with the WH saying that they backed him. And by then, it was already becoming very very clear that she had been smeared. That's what made the difference to me THIS TIME.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 22, 2010 11:23 AM | Report abuse

One of the reasons I like to comment here is because I believe the regulars here and Greg have a lot of insightful things to say. Obviously, we all have our own opinions and I try to respect those, whether I agree or not. I don't like to keep debating the same issue over and over so I'll leave you guys to your own devices on this debate. I've spoken my piece and explained my position, time for me to move on to other subjects.

Greg, I believe that a substantial part of Breibart's credibility has been blown, what little he had on the right that is. His role in this was not dismissed but highlighted whether they refuse to use his name or not over at FOX or on Morning Joe. This dust up made everyone look bad IMO, except for Shirley Sherrod and the two farmers she helped, but most importantly it showed what a smear campaign can do to an average citizen's life, and most people of reason don't like it. The media may try to move on from what Breitbart did, and their complicity, but I don't think average Americans will and we have a longer memory.

Posted by: lmsinca | July 22, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

"So why aren't we seeing more along these lines?"

It's really quite simple. Writing about Breitbart doesn't sell. Writing about the White House? Now that sells. It's all about profitability.

Posted by: kosmo1 | July 22, 2010 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Liam-still... your post is so spot on. The sentiments expressed in your post by the right I wish every left blogger could read.

The left is going to let the Republicans back into power. They are so busy tearing down their own president and being so righteous they don't see that their "it's not good enough" stance is hurting their own cause.

The right sees it and knows how to stoke the left to bash this President. I guess the left would rather be against something than for it.

Posted by: Jalenth | July 22, 2010 11:27 AM | Report abuse

'News orgs love "winners and losers" stories. Reporters and editors love to talk about other media figures.'

With the glaring exception of those that reflect negatively on themselves -- i.e., they're the "losers". I'd have expected Greg to fully understand this.

Assigned penance: several hours browsing the archives at dailyhowler.com to get caught up.

Posted by: oaguabonita | July 22, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

lmsinca, appreciate it.

And thanks, Ethan. We will continue to disagree but I still maintain that it's possible to cover both the Breitbart/Fox angle and the Obama administration's conduct, and that they needn't be mutually exclusive.

The White House, properly, apologized. But before that happened, this was very much an important angle to focus on, IMHO.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 22, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

"Why it was hard for me to do THIS TIME"

I totally hear ya Sue.

And believe me, there's nothing more that I'd like to do than stand behind one of the more remarkable public figures and civil rights champions we've seen (or been introduced to) in some time, Ms. Sherrod.

But, unfortunately, I strongly believe the best way to serve HER and her cause -- OUR collective cause of civil rights and justice for all -- is to do what I have said. Orient to the source and then unleash a hellstorm designed to thoroughly and completely dismantle their credibility in any and every way.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 22, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Last night on ABC Nightline the clueless Moran seems to have been idolizing this Brietbart. Watching the newwork news is like reading a comic book.

Posted by: truth1 | July 22, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Greg,

I've read several of the morning show transcripts, and saw Morning Joe this am at home, and so far only Jon Meacham has asked the questions you raised. He focused less on Breitbart than on the entire industry, asking whether the rush to publish five seconds before another source had obliterated the journalistic coda of getting the story right. I guess that was a rhetorical question. He added an interesting thought that we have reverted to a 19th century partisan media (a plug for his book on Jackson, no doubt), which is totally out of control in a 21st century technological environment.

Several other talking head shows interviewing Sherrod went out of their way to say that the Ag Dept., White House and NAACP had the chance to review the full tape before rushing to judgement, ignoring the media's responsibility.

As final thought I realize the buck stops with Obama etc, but have difficulty accepting the argument that this is somehow another sign that he has gone off the rails in his efforts to make the US a better place. On Tuesday when story broke he had the finance reform bill signing, meetings with PM Cameron, and with national security advisors on Afghanistan. And this story is the subject of a three day news orgy? Also after months of media agonizing over whether Obama and his Admin are overstepping their authority on the economy, immigration policy, and all the rest? Linus said it best - good grief.

Posted by: BillB10 | July 22, 2010 11:34 AM | Report abuse

@sue: "sbj, why are attempting to paint Greg with the "journolist brush" when he wasn't part of the group?"

I clearly did NOT try to paint Greg with a brush.

Greg regularly links to the several of the Journolist writers. The credibility of several of these writers has now taken a severe beating. It seems to me to be a double standard to be so concerned with Breitbart's "credibility" (Greg has never given Breitbart any credibility!) while ignoring the explosive quotes we've now all seen from the Journolist.

Posted by: sbj3 | July 22, 2010 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Welcome Greg, and thanks for taking the time to understand my point of view even if we disagree. And not just you, but everyone commenting. I truly appreciate that about you, this blog, and the awesome community of commenters! At the end of the day, I hope lmsinca is right! Then again, that's almost always how I feel, hehe.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | July 22, 2010 11:39 AM | Report abuse

@ethan: Thanks very much for the clue about the Kurtz piece. It's very important:

"But for all the chatter -- some of it from Sherrod herself -- that she was done in by Fox News, the network didn't touch the story until her forced resignation was made public Monday evening, with the exception of brief comments by O'Reilly. After a news meeting Monday afternoon, an e-mail directive was sent to the news staff in which Fox Senior Vice President Michael Clemente said:"

"Let's take our time and get the facts straight on this story. Can we get confirmation and comments from Sherrod before going on-air. Let's make sure we do this right."

"Sherrod may be the only official ever dismissed because of the fear that Fox host Glenn Beck might go after her."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/21/AR2010072106708.html

Posted by: sbj3 | July 22, 2010 11:40 AM | Report abuse

sbj: "Greg regularly links to the several of the Journolist writers."

Do you have evidence of factual errors by any of the Journalist writers or quotes that Greg has used from them?

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 22, 2010 11:40 AM | Report abuse

This thread is proving that Breibart is still getting paid big dividends on his evil gambit.

It is still dominating the blog.

President Obama has indicated that he wants to start talks with The Taliban.

That is a massive story; because it is a clear admission that the McChrystal plan is a failure.

Of course why cover that major story, that involves the lives of many thousand of brave young Americans, and their families, when we can all continue to hyperventilate over one fairly minor screw up by an Administration that has accomplished many major achievements in just it's first eighteen months..

Now; I will let all you absolutists who will always opt to let the demand for perfection; be the enemy of the good, get back to your sanctimonious whining.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 22, 2010 11:40 AM | Report abuse

"Has any news org done a stand-alone story on the damage the Shirley Sherrod mess has done -- or should do -- to his credibility?"

I'm sure The Politico story will be coming out at any moment.

Okay, seriously, I couldn't even type that without laughing....

Posted by: schrodingerscat | July 22, 2010 11:42 AM | Report abuse

I posted this on the Morning Roundup, but it was at the end.

Take a few minutes to read this today about the settlement of the USDA class action lawsuit. Congress has to fund it.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/shirley_sherrod_and_the_discrimination_of_black_fa.php?ref=fpa

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 22, 2010 11:43 AM | Report abuse

"The Left, finally and once and for all, needs to learn the lesson that you need to hit back immediately and hard at the core competence of the perpetrators of this type of attack."

Ethan, read your comment again and tell me how the WH did this, unless you don't consider them part of the left? That is the entire point of my complaint, is that rather than do as you suggest they hit back immediately at the one innocent victim. Not every angle should be seen through the prism of an election cycle, sometimes good policy and honesty make for good politics as well. Sheesh.

O & O

Posted by: lmsinca | July 22, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse

@sue: Greg links to opinion pieces by, for example, Spencer Ackerman. This man urged fellow writers to baselessly accuse Fred Barnes of being a racist: "Instead, take one of them - Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares - and call them racists."

Posted by: sbj3 | July 22, 2010 11:46 AM | Report abuse

All, Sharron Angle may still be taking money from the Tea Party leader who wrote that "colored people" letter to Lincoln:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/07/sharron_angle_may_still_take_t.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 22, 2010 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Why was a salacious LIE allowed to be spread about a woman who did no wrong? Is that too simple a question to answer? At long last, we will ever get the story right?

Posted by: mark1161 | July 22, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

liberals wrongfully ate one of their own applying their tested and true tactics of hyper-speed political correctness and we have breitbart to thank for it. also, democrats now will have to think twice before they falsely charge racism before letting the other side explain itself (for example, are we any more guilty of this than you are?). else, democrats will open themselves to charges of hypocrisy in a way that would only confirm many people's pre-concieved notions of them.

Posted by: dummypants | July 22, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

It makes one wonder as to the judgment of a Cabinent official who would shoot from the hip based on the "fair and balenced" reporting of Rove's propaganda organ, Fox News.

It doesn't matter if Fox misrepresented. Their minions only hear what they want to hear and disregard the rest.

Posted by: areyousaying | July 22, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse

Why was a salacious LIE allowed to be spread about a woman who did no wrong?
*******

did she or did she not discriminate against them at first? sure, democratic senator from WV was a member of the klan, but that was ages ago...this is why tea parties do not loose much sleep over there bring one numbskull at a rally of thousands with an inane poster?

Posted by: dummypants | July 22, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse

sbj,

why would you be "astounded"? The Kleins and the MSM spend their time trying to report news, not nitpicking stories written by others to expose "liberal media bias". Breitbart is being hoisted on his own petard.

Remember, hypocrisy will always be a big story...

Posted by: pcpatterson | July 22, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse

dummypants,

I read your post and now I'm all the dummer for it.

Posted by: bmcchgo | July 22, 2010 11:57 AM | Report abuse

Greg - seriously?

They didn't bother reporting on how Breitbart edited the ACORN tapes when that fact finally came out. They knew he had been discredited in that little exercise, and yet had no problem with swallowing the next one whole.

They aren't going to focus on Breitbart. Because to do so, they would have to admit that they aren't concerned with whether their sources are credible or not, and they also can't be bothered to do the minimal WORK involved in following up and verifying what the previously-demonstrated uncredible source is pimping this time around. It would also reveal their dishonesty in the whole ACORN exercise - they aided and abetted Breitbart's racist desire to put the organization out of business - and then failed to own up to their role in that shamefulness when the truth came out.

Focusing on Breitbart focuses a spotlight on the media's general lack of competence. So, obviously, it's time for another blogger ethics panel!!!

Posted by: JennOfArk | July 22, 2010 11:58 AM | Report abuse

Why isn't Andrew Breitbart and Fox news prosecuted for slander?

Posted by: vidusa | July 22, 2010 11:58 AM | Report abuse

Of course not. The MSM hasn't cared about the truth at least since 2000. And, as long as Breitbart's lies and slander equal viewers/readers for them, that's all the MSM cares about.

The "winners and losers" scenario doesn't apply here. The MSM is just as afraid of the right wing freaks as Obama is, and they can't control this story - and they can't control Shirley Sherrod.

Shirley Sherrod is collateral damage as far as the MSM is concerned. Same goes for the Obama administration that didn't even give her her old job back but offered her something that seemed obviously calculated to just make her go away.

Posted by: solsticebelle | July 22, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse


No, but it damaged Barry the incompetent boob Obama and his three ring circus of bunglers.

Pathetic Barry led around by the nose by his own imagined fears. Pathetic.

Miserable failure Obama

Posted by: screwjob17 | July 22, 2010 12:07 PM | Report abuse


It was Barry the inept bungler who fired Shirley Sherrod -- not Andrew Breitbart.

Posted by: screwjob17 | July 22, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

@sbj3:The credibility of several of these writers has now taken a severe beating.

Only in bizzaro sbj3 world where up is down and heavily edited videos and listserv discussions are truth. Of course, sbj3 can't actually point to any actual reporting by those reporters was inaccurate or even more fundamentally why a group or reporters and their sources can't get together and discuss issues.

Posted by: srw3 | July 22, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

This better be Breitbart's last and only chance.. IF there are any more incidences
like this one the credibility of ANYTHING that comes from the media is 100% crap.. and you can't recover.

So, if you folks as journalist EVER want a story published, you've got to earn back the trust of the people on the streets. Today - you and Breitbart are the same.

Posted by: rbaldwin2 | July 22, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

It's sad the the mainstream media is more interested in covering their collective butts than in getting the real story out there.

The real story is that a right-wing conservative, aided and abetted by a right wing "news" organization perpetrated a huge lie against a good person for political gain and the rest of the media went along with it.

You got caught NOT doing your jobs and now you want to make it about Obama and the Administration. Even PBS News Hour last night had no mention of Fox or the part they played in this. They only vaguely referred to Big Government.com.

You have collective egg on your faces and now everyone is doing the old "hey, look over there" routine.

And you guys wonder why no one trusts the news any more.

Posted by: basket | July 22, 2010 12:17 PM | Report abuse

dummypants: "did she or did she not discriminate against them at first?"

No, she did not. Follow along now. (You're screen name speaks volumes.) She thought about it, but then acted otherwise, and actually helped them save their farm.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | July 22, 2010 12:18 PM | Report abuse

okay, im'm getting sick of htis 'lunatic left' bullshit. f*(k off.

the wh screwed up. we on the left are not like the idiots on the right who cannot *ever* note their mistakes.

quit whining that we called them out. you're calling us out for hitting our own and you're doing that several orders of magnitude more than anyone on the left ever did.

deal with it.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 22, 2010 12:21 PM | Report abuse

@sbj3: This man urged fellow writers to baselessly accuse Fred Barnes of being a racist: "Instead, take one of them - Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares - and call them racists."

Typical rightwing smear. Where is the context for this comment? Did anyone actually act on it? Where are the examples of Ackerman putting this into practice? What were the responses? Did several folks on the list actively discourage this train of thought, like many reporters did when a non-journalist suggested the FCC pulling fox's license? Feel free to ride the journolist hobby horse, just don't expect thinking people to saddle up with you when you provide no context...

Posted by: srw3 | July 22, 2010 12:23 PM | Report abuse

remember, sbj asserts that fox doesn't engage in racism and doesn't pursue a artisan agenda.

his credibility is not exactly high.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 22, 2010 12:25 PM | Report abuse

Regardless of who edited the tape or how he got it, the fundamental point should be: He did not check his sources AT ALL and he got the story 100% wrong. That should kill his credibility for all time, but sadly the conservatives still consider him credible because he attacks "the left."

Posted by: leftcoaster | July 22, 2010 12:26 PM | Report abuse


It was Barry the inept bungler who fired Shirley Sherrod -- not Andrew Breitbart.

Posted by: screwjob17 | July 22, 2010 12:31 PM | Report abuse

I agree that there's in the rush to get "something" out there, that those in the media have neglected due diligence.

Could there perhaps be a news outlet with the motto "We get it right"?

Posted by: MichelleKinPA | July 22, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Not only should this "damage" Breitbart... it should get him sued.

Posted by: CardFan | July 22, 2010 12:34 PM | Report abuse

@blahgblogwordpresscom: partisan. SBJ3 still hasn't explained how the execs at fox news proclaiming that they are "the voice of the opposition" makes them anything but partisan. certainly the support for obstructing the obama agenda, repeated active encouragement of the tea parties and promoting their events (as opposed to actually reporting on them), the adopting of false and misleading statements from their opinion shows and migrating them to their "news" programs (Some say that Obama is a crypto-socialist- Nazi.) Is he? To discuss this we have Newt Gringich, political contributor since 1999,...)

Posted by: srw3 | July 22, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Unfortunately, nothing short of incarceration can damage a sociopath like Breitbart. What would help, though, would be if the so-called news media would stop hanging breathlessly on his every word. That, sadly, will happen at about the same time the "news" media stops using Drudge as their primary source of "news," which will happen approximately never. The prostitutes that make up (in Sarah Palin's colorful terminolgy) the lamestream media, with very few exceptions, will run far and fast before actually checking out a story. They're far more comfortable with fiction and fact.

Posted by: nicekid | July 22, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

"Miserable failure Obama


Posted by: screwjob17 | July 22, 2010 12:07 PM"

"Just Eighteen months into a 48 Month first, and probably only term, how is President Obama doing?


Stopped the economic meltdown, caused by The Republican policies, that they want to return to.

Passed the most important Wall St Casino Banks regulations bill, since The Republicans" Earlier Great Depression.

Passed a history making National Health Care Reform bill, where several other Presidents had failed.

Adding Two Women to The Supreme Court, setting a record of three, that will now be on it, at the same time.

Passed the Lily Ledbetter, equal pay, for equal work law.

Negotiated a new START treaty with Russia.

Has made a large down payment on an effort to establish a green energy domestic production economy.

Has most of the world looking up to the President Of The USA, instead of despising him.

Posted by: Liam-still | July 22, 2010 11:03 AM"


OK, screwjob17, exactly what has Obama failed at?

Posted by: wiccan | July 22, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse


It was Barry the inept bungler who fired Shirley Sherrod -- not Andrew Breitbart.

Posted by: screwjob17 | July 22, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

//// Once again, remember, "Barry" is just a code word for boy.

Posted by: Keesvan | July 22, 2010 12:48 PM | Report abuse

(1) How many followers of Breitbart are going to change their minds in light of the new information vindicating Sherrod?

(2) The all too quick dismissal of Sherrod ultimately damages the Obama administration. It won't sink the his presidency; however, it does mean a lot of bad PR.

Posted by: UnPatriotic | July 22, 2010 12:49 PM | Report abuse

And why exactly is nobody reporting that FOX News has abandoned the most basic standards of journalism (check the veracity of selective facts fed to you by sources known to lie)?

Why is no one reporting on FOX's apparent desire to incite racial forment by pushing un-sourced stories or by creating stories out of non-events like the Black Panther "voter intimidation" stuff?

Maybe it's time to stop reflexively protecting them just because they are conservative, and re-visit the allegation that Fox News is "not a news organization."

They are pushing FALSE STORIES!

Posted by: theorajones1 | July 22, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Robert Gibbs calls on media to do some soul searching about Sherrod case:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/07/gibbs_calls_on_media_to_do_sou_1.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | July 22, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

When will the "main stream media" stop quoting Breitbart and Fox as news sources rather than the propaganda machines that they are?

And by the way, don't Andrew Breitbart's actions bring to mind the old Richard Nixon "rat f&*$$#" type of behavior?

Posted by: Beaplum | July 22, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

srw,

ya. as i said yesterday, i think he wants to wash his hands of the racism and partisanship so he claims he doesn't see it. he may even have fooled himself but he certainly isn't convincing anyone else.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | July 22, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

I think that the WH/USDA and Ms. Sherrod were the more immediate story--that "game" was still unfolding, so people could question/speculate on what was gonna be the next "play," but as that winds down--I don't know how much comes after "will she or won't she take the job offer,"--the recap of the game (how we got here) will begin.

Of course the other problem is it'll be the media covering itself, and they're naturally going to want to paint themselves in the best light possible, given how many of them ran the tape, and how few of them questioned it's source then.

In a perfect world, Breitbart would be finished as a the PT Barnum of rightwing propaganda. He's "snookered" alot of suckers all along the political spectrum and among the "we like to see ourselves as fair and balanced, whether we are or not" media (and besides, their game is to be the snookerers, not the snookered) and folks don't much enjoy being told they're among the suckers who're always being born. Assuming he even gets an appearance--or even a mention--in the legitimate media, his name should be prefaced by the words "disgraced conservative blogger" for a good long time.

Unfortunately, that's probably not what's going to happen.

Hopefully though, the vast majority of media types will remember this whole episode, and will do a better job of vetting the subject matter and the sources of their stories, and will check every single thing disgraced conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart says, does, or brings them, right down to double checking his name, two or three times, at least.

Whoever edited that tape so maliciously--and honestly, I'm not so sure it wasn't DCBAB, himself--deserves well... a good talking to, at the very least. (Even DCB Ann Coulter thinks DCBAB should reveal his source, marking perhaps the first time she and I agree about anything, and the slight possibility that Shirley may sue--and thus discovery--does please me no end.) (I"m also real curious about whoever e-mailed Ms. Sherrod to "taunt" her about the video last Thursday--several days before the breitbarted video was released, and even before DCBAB even had it, according to what he said in his Tuesday CNN appearance. If anyone has heard any more about the identities of either--especially if one or both turn out to be DCBAB, himself--lemmie know.)

Posted by: repsac3 | July 22, 2010 12:57 PM | Report abuse

You guys and gals can chit chat back and forth all you like but it does not change the fact that Obama is going to be a one and done president.

If the Democrats want to cut the Republicans off at the need here is the answer.

1. Immediately repeal NAFTA and Renegotiate all trade rules to make it a level playing field for American workers.

2.Obama is on the wrong side of the immigration debate. Do a 180 and do whatever necessary to secure the border and drop all talk of amnesty. Obama comes off like he does not care about the citizens of this country only the illegals and that is going to cost the Democrats heavily in November.


Will big business flip out--yeah but they are not in the dems corner anyway and since the majority of people like the new Arizona law you will gain a lot of people back you have lost.

or you can just continue on your current course and get totally shafted by the American voter.

Posted by: PennyWisetheClown | July 22, 2010 12:59 PM | Report abuse

I hardly ever check out the Fox News site--but if you do now you will see PLENTY of people berating them for what they and Breitbart have done to Sherrod. It's really refreshing to see. Take a break from the present circular firing squad here and check it out. Mainstream America has got the message about Fox? I hope.

Posted by: jandmward | July 22, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Andrew Briebart was so creepy about the whole situaton. First, he airs the thing knowing full well he was going to bring this Lady down and knowing full well that the tape was a lie. Once it was uncovered he simply ignores his his part in this whole situation and finds fault with USDA officials and the White House.

His interviews were creepy, like the guy wouldn't know and doesn't know truth when it slams him in the face. Truth is not at all important to this individual, facts are simply non-existent to this individual it's all about the PROP (propaganda/political.)

At least CNN (Anderson Cooper 360) did a good segment on that show about the fall out and Breitbarts role in posting the lie.
But certainly not enough focus has been put on Breitbart and Fox News as the folks who attacked an innocent woman for their own benefit.

People who go to or follow this web site are idiots, period. Nuttin but a whold lot of nuttin does this man spew. He's creepy.

Posted by: rannrann | July 22, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

Ha, what advice, pennywise. Cut Republicans off at the knees by giving them everything they want! That'll show 'em!

Let's see what happens to Arizona's economy when their cheap labor is gone and their law enforcement budgets are broken. Never mind paying for "the danged fence"

Posted by: leftcoaster | July 22, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

The news media likes this stuff. Like volunteer firemen sometimes like to set fires.

Posted by: Phil5 | July 22, 2010 1:08 PM | Report abuse

wow what a whole bunch of fighting words here. The temperature on this thread is mighty high. And that's taking into account the fact that the liberals here are card carrying members of the undies in a wad squad.

but the question is: what are going to do about it? Right now the conservatives have clear proof that the liberals in the media colluded to advance an agenda.

Were I the publisher of the WaPo I would fire Mr Klein and anyone associated with his list serv. Why? Because the publication's success rests directly on its credibility and now that trademark is quite tarnished.

why would anyone believe anything they read in this newspaper now?

the long suspected liberal bias is finally proved. And that's why the Sherrod thing is soooo important to folks like Mr Sargent. Great timing, this. Something to distract America away from the bombshell revelations about just exactly how nasty the liberals in media are.

Some here suggested that people be "called out". OK, I'm fine with that. Spencer Ackerman wants to put my head through a plate glass window. He believes that I should live in constant fear.

I welcome the opportunity to return the favor.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | July 22, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

Why is it so hard to say I was wrong and I'm sorry? Afraid to lose half of his Racist following if he is seen as cowering to the left. You can still be Racist and admit that you were wrong about the way this was handled. I can respect a Racist with integrity, or is that really possible?

Posted by: minco_007 | July 22, 2010 1:10 PM | Report abuse

MSNBC was going after Breitbart last night, Wednesday, full on. They were at their demonizing best--it's a mudfight (accusations of racism going back and forth). I agree with Greg, focus on media coverage, or lack of, what passes for coverage.

Posted by: jaw444 | July 22, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

"Have any high profile traditional media figures come right out and said that Breitbart -- who admitted flat out that he received the Sherrod video unedited and posted it without tracking down the orignal -- has dealt himself a severe blow here?"

Greg, you and your back-slapping buddies here apall me by your ceaseless efforts to deflect, change the subject, whitewash the real issue and the real intent of the Breitbart video clip. It wasn't to smear Ms Sherrod. It was to point out the audience reaction to her statements. They applauded and laughed when Ms Sherrod related why she didn't help the white farmers as she could have. The point was to show rascist behavior within the NAACP...effectively done until you twerps decided that 'unwelcome fact' became too laughable to try to refute and switched the targeting scheme to Breitbart.

Additionally...what major media personalities have cowboyed-up and admitted they helped stuff Ms Sherrod under the bus by their wholesale jumping on the bandwagon and misconstruing this story? (I mean besides Glenn Beck who wouldn't play the clip and stated up front that she did no wrong and that she was owed an apology...before any body else did). You toads are the 'press.' Aren't YOU the ones who are supposed to seek clarity and truth? Aren't YOU the guys who are supposed to be getting to the bottom of the story for the rest of us? Is it any wonder that major MSM outlets...especially print outlets...are foundering because nobody trusts them anymore?

Your feigned righteous indignation is turning my stomach. As for the power of the blogosphere...the overwhelming majority of Americans don't read you idiots. Only you idiots read you idiots. You are all guilty of believing your own press releases.

Posted by: PanhandleWilly | July 22, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

Ha, what advice, pennywise. Cut Republicans off at the knees by giving them everything they want! That'll show 'em!

Let's see what happens to Arizona's economy when their cheap labor is gone and their law enforcement budgets are broken. Never mind paying for "the danged fence"
*******************************************

Who cares what the GOP wants it is what the American worker is clamoring for.
But hey what do i know i am only one of the worker bees in our great country.

See you in November.

Posted by: PennyWisetheClown | July 22, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse

It has long been established that Breitbart & Fox News are liars. My young children have known for the last 10-years not to believe ANYTHING Fox News report. The Obama Administration, NAACP, and MSM have long known not to believe Breitbart & Fox news so why the h3ll did they! What the h3ll is it about that lying sob Glen Beck that has this White House so fearful of what he might say?? Why the h3ll haven't Obama gone Nixon on these asSSS wipes is beyond me!!!!

President Obama!!!! You are the President of the United States!!! But you are acting like the kid who will accept and do any desperate act to be liked by people who will NEVER LIKE YOU!! SO PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE START KICKING THEIR ASSES. GEEEE! Chris Matthews does a far better job of putting these cowards with microphones in their place!!!! I am one of your biggest fan President Obama but I am losing respect for you because you haven't figured out yet that it has long been time to start kicking some asses. COME ON!!!

Posted by: SteelWheel25 | July 22, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Oh and as far as "That danged fence" We have had 30,000 troops on the border of South Korea/North Korea for the last 50 years enforcing a border so please don't say it can not be done or really why i should care about the cost.

Posted by: PennyWisetheClown | July 22, 2010 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Greg, Mrs. Sherrod was indeed maligned and slandered by everyone involved, however, there is a point to this story that needs to be highlighted. Mrs. Sherrod and her husband along with several other black families, was awarded $13 million, most for loss of land and loss of income and included $300,000 for the Sherrods, this, I believe, was the "Pigford Settlement". Congress has paid out money for TARP, AIG, GM, and everyone else in town but has not voted to supply the money to pay this legal settlement to these black farmers. THAT IS TRUE RACIAL DISCRIMINATION!

Posted by: Taylorsucram | July 22, 2010 1:34 PM | Report abuse

The media is afraid of ultra-conservatives. They will play dumb about Breitbart's edited video.

Posted by: kingsbridge77 | July 22, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

America has such little regard for the press that the latter find more fertile ground in championing causes or personalities. Advocacy journalists are expected to go lowbrow, just as many in the blogosphere and in chat rooms, because they are not punished for it, and it brings eyeballs to associated advertising.

Just look at Breitbart--ever ready with excuses: "I didn't edit the speech, I just ran it." No apology for his role in smearing a conscientous official, because she works for the Obama administration, his enemy. At least we now know Breitbart for what he is--a shark without integrity.

Posted by: bitterblogger | July 22, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

@ss28: If the journalolist archive is sooo full of evil, why isn't carlson releasing the entire archive? Ezra won't do this because he honors the promise of the listserv being off the record, but clearly carlson doesn't have that to worry about, so why not a complete release? He could serialize it, to spread out the media circus.

Could it be that selective editing of some of the emails makes a better brickbat to use on dems? Of course that would be intellectually dishonest and a violation of journalistic ethics by purposefully putting out one-sided and misleading if not outright false information and we know that people like carlson and Breitbard would never do that...I mean look at the Sherrod case...oh wait....

And how about the timing of the sherrod debacle. Could the choice of day have anything to do with:
-Obama signing finreg into law?
-the USDA black farmer discrimination settlement needing funding?

Breitbart acknowledges that he has had the tape for several weeks (plenty of time to actually check if the tape was an accurate portrayal of Sherrod's talk, BTW) but he chose today...hmmmm

Posted by: srw3 | July 22, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Absolutely no question that Andrew Breitbart is now a pariah and the whole right winger crowd has been exposed for what they are - hypocrites, compassionless, backward, and will always resort to dirty tricks. They have done it in the past and will do it in the future. This wrecking crew has plagued progress in this country for decades.

Conservatism - the poison that keeps on giving!

Posted by: Obadiah55 | July 22, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

The better question is how much damage has the Sherrod story done to the NAACP and Obama?? They looked like fools!!

Breitbart made a key point - The Left doesn't stop and think. They have their story they are selling and anyone or thing in the way is toast. NAACP and Obama threw Sherrod under the bus.

And on the Sherrod tape, it does prove another point - Sherrods audience was laughing and shouting praise during the story. Sherrod may have taken a left turn in the last 15 seconds, but her audience clearly liked putting down whites.

Posted by: grcac | July 22, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Americans are ignorant. I don't give a ratz patootie about Breitbart or his Right-Wing hack supporters exerting a whole bunch of time and energy trying to make blacks racists just like them. Fools will always be fools, even those who claim to be journalist.

And to prove my point.

President Obama just signed off on two or three more historical landmark bills concerning Financial Reform and Unemployment benefits when all of this craziness was going on. The funny thing is, is that not too many people noticed what just happened in the last 3 days with "real news", because of all of the "racists psycho drama" instigated by ignorant white folks like Breitbart.

Do you hear what I am saying?

Posted by: lcarter0311 | July 22, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Willy, they laughed because they got it, in a way that Breitbart never will. They knew where she was going. It was a lot of their stories. You had to be there, and i don't just mean at the speech.

I first saw the story on Hannity. I went to biggovernment.com as directed, to see the 'whole' video. I saw the clip that presents Sherrod as a mean-spirited petty person. When it got to the end of the clip, she was clearly still in the middle of her story and i thought to myself, "I wonder what the rest of the story is." Only an idiot would think the woman would get up there and portray herself that way, obviously there was more to it?

I was going to do some research and try to find the answer on the web, but then i thought to myself, "I can just wait til tomorrow The media will dig for it and it will come out, i don't have to take the time right now, i'll find out soon enough,"
And sure enough, it did.

People that believe this smear, whether of Sherrod and of her audience, are showing their ignorance. It's not that people, white or black, don't experience racial and other prejudice, but it's not simple, it's complex, and the wiser people learn moral lessons as they go along. And Sherrod's audience was resonating with her whole story, which apparently some people didn't sense was more complex than what Breitbart wanted to represent, or misrepresent deliberately.

As Sherrod said in the speech, "God puts things in your path" to teach you, and the audience murmured in agreement. That was on the part we didn't see until the next day. Talk about petty and mean-spirited.

Posted by: jaw444 | July 22, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

"...the real issue and the real intent of the Breitbart video clip. It wasn't to smear Ms Sherrod. It was to point out the audience reaction to her statements. They applauded and laughed when Ms Sherrod related why she didn't help the white farmers as she could have. The point was to show rascist behavior within the NAACP..."

Panhandle Willy reveals himself as yet another mouth-breather who hasn't seen the unedited tape.

First of all, there would have been no need to selectively edit the tape if the goal was not to smear Mrs. Sherrod.

Also, in the unedited version of the tape, in the portion just preceding the clip Breitbart put forward, Mrs. Sherrod prefaces the story by saying she was going to relate an example of how her thoughts on matters of race had evolved. Seems that clip could have easily been included without showing the entire speech...yet mysteriously, it also ended up edited out, because Breitbart's intent wasn't to "smear Mrs. Sherrod."

Not only that, but hearing Mrs. Sherrod preface the Breitbart clip, the audience in attendance also knew that the part shown as "evidence" of NAACP racism wasn't the end of the story. Was it wrong for them to laugh or clap or whatever when Mrs. Sherrod told this part of the story? No wronger than it is for me to laugh at TeaBaggers when they do stupid things. We all take some measure of pleasure in hearing about people getting doled out some righteous karma. In the case Mrs. Sherrod noted, the white farmer had made clear to her that he didn't think she could help him. Her initial reaction was "ok, Mr. Know-It-All, I can't help you, so I'll send you to someone else."

I've been in that position before with clients and customers. People who presume I'm either incompetent or stupid or whatever - I try to get rid of them too, because they are time vampires who don't appreciate your efforts and are never pleased. Life's too short, you know? Let them be someone else's problem. That's not a "racist" thing; that's a HUMAN thing.

So no, the unedited tape doesn't show "racism" on anyone's part. Which is why it was heavily edited.

Posted by: JennOfArk | July 22, 2010 1:47 PM | Report abuse

We could ask Robert Gibbs to do some soul searching as well, but aren't we already pretty sure he'd just come up empty?

Posted by: etpietro | July 22, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

I just signed up here to say THANK YOU!!! I've been reading news and blog comments for a long time, and this is actually the first time I've ever seen actual lengthy discussion, and not just angry, "make myself feel better about myself" mud slinging.

I'm a little left of center, enough that liberals consider me conservative and conservatives label me liberal, but I really appreciate seeing honest intelligent discussions from all points of view. That's been very hard to find the last 10 years or so.

Sorry for the off topic post.

Posted by: PhilDebowl | July 22, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

"Willy, they laughed because they got it,"

Yeah...I got it too. The same way I got it when I saw footage of Palestinians dancing in the streets after 9-11. I get it that REAL feelings are present when people are feeling a little too comfortable in their surroundings and they're 'among friends.' I got it. I also get it when I see defenders who take sides while trying to sound objective. Your response is squarely in the two wrongs make a right category. The real point of the clip still stands.

Posted by: PanhandleWilly | July 22, 2010 2:11 PM | Report abuse

And again....where was the press? WHERE WERE the protectors of the truth when they were needed? They were busy throwing this woman under the bus...with the administration. Where are they now? Anybody on the airwaves questioning their complicity...or is it just on to the next splashy headline in the cycle?

Posted by: PanhandleWilly | July 22, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

yeah, the good old "Selective Editing" dodge. Right on schedule.

Look, those people said what they said. Spencer Ackerman wants to do violence to his opposition.

Even on this thread I see claims that those who publish things of which the left doesn't approve should be silenced.

Nope, it won't wash. The pattern is clear. I live it everyday. These boys and girls came up with an evil way to accomplish their goals. We conservatives have been saying this for a long time. The left has learned to rely on the slanderous claim of "racist!" to stifle the opposition. Now we know that the press corp embraced this tactic.

don't you guys feel even a bit of shame?

If the members of the journolist believe that they have been libeled, let them lawyer up and sue. Intellectual honesty is something scoundrels rely on when they have nothing else to offer. Actions speak louder than words.

If spencer Ackerman didn't actually write that I should live in fear let him sue Mr Carlson. go ahead, make our day.
And if the timing of releases bothers you so, so me a copy of a letter you sent to Obama demanding that he stop releasing bad news on Friday Afternoon. Wouldn't that be "intellectual honesty"? Just too funny.

Once more a liberal chants the mantra: do as we say, not as we do!

Not a chance.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | July 22, 2010 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Willy, the "real point" still stands - Breitbart is a vicious racist who edited out parts that contradicted what he wanted to show - and what YOU want to believe. So in that sense, yes, it totally proves that you're a poor oppressed guy because some black folks laughed at a story about a know-it-all being told to p*ss off, like people of all races do on a regular basis.

Fox News and characters like Breitbart exist for no other reason than to provide spirtual Preparation H for the perpetual butthurt of low-grade losers and idiots.

Posted by: JennOfArk | July 22, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

How or why would a "damaged" Breitbart be of any concern to anyone?

Posted by: kinkysr | July 22, 2010 2:20 PM | Report abuse

How or why would a "damaged" Breitbart be of any concern to anyone?

Posted by: kinkysr | July 22, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Breitbart is a blithering idiot - a clown who gets far more attention than he deserves.

Posted by: ancientdude | July 22, 2010 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Breitbart is a blithering idiot - a clown who gets far more attention than he deserves.

Posted by: ancientdude | July 22, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Is it just me, or did fox news take all of their comments offline? Every story now has a NaN in place of the amount of comments, and there are no comments.

Posted by: PhilDebowl | July 22, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse

this is the worst kind of dodge:
++++++++++++++
Typical rightwing smear. Where is the context for this comment? Did anyone actually act on it? Where are the examples of Ackerman putting this into practice? What were the responses? Did several folks on the list actively discourage this train of thought, like many reporters did when a non-journalist suggested the FCC pulling fox's license? Feel free to ride the journolist hobby horse, just don't expect thinking people to saddle up with you when you provide no context...

+++++++++++++++

If Spencer Ackerman believes that he's being purposefully misrepresented, if he thinks he's being libeled here, then let him sue. Out of context my sweet aunt Nina. He said what he said. Nasty, nasty little boy.

Any time he wants to try his prescription on me, I'm ready.

further, all Mr Ackerman did was to prove what conservatives have understood for quite some time: the left will rely on the false accusation of racism as a tool.

so sorry, but the mask has come off. The left has been using this slander for years and now we know how pervasive this tactic is. Have liberals lost all sense of shame? It certainly appears that way.

Are you really going to stand up for that punk kid?

Posted by: skipsailing28 | July 22, 2010 2:27 PM | Report abuse

The credibility of Breitbart is just fine. Nobody cares what he says except wingnuts. And wingnuts don't give a rip about the credibility of their chosen news source. Their only concern is to have their quasi religious political beliefs validated.

For proof, observe that the wingnuts not only all watch Fox News, but they believe what Fox News tells them.

Posted by: ravenmocker | July 22, 2010 2:30 PM | Report abuse

"Yes, Willy, the "real point" still stands - Breitbart is a vicious racist who edited out parts that contradicted what he wanted to show - and what YOU want to believe. So in that sense, yes, it totally proves that you're a poor oppressed guy because some black folks laughed at a story about a know-it-all being told to p*ss off, like people of all races do on a regular basis."

Not oppressed...and certainly not trying to tint the truth to suit my prejudices. If this incident were just about putting a know-it-all in his place...why refer to race at all? You're deluding yourself Jenn. The point, context and truth of the clip was to show that the NAACP has no moral high ground to call anybody a racist organization. To argue otherwise is laughable. And I'm only a mouth-breather when something around me stinks.

Posted by: PanhandleWilly | July 22, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

The following is part of the introduction to the video from Big Government.com. The video was not just about Shirley Sherrod. It was about the response by the NAACP members in the audience before they learned that Shirley eventually did help the farmer.
-------------------------------------------

"We are in possession of a video from in which Shirley Sherrod, USDA Georgia Director of Rural Development, speaks at the NAACP Freedom Fund dinner in Georgia. In her meandering speech to what appears to be an all-black audience, this federally appointed executive bureaucrat lays out in stark detail, that her federal duties are managed through the prism of race and class distinctions.
In the first video, Sherrod describes how she racially discriminates against a white farmer. She describes how she is torn over how much she will choose to help him. And, she admits that she doesn’t do everything she can for him, because he is white. Eventually, her basic humanity informs that this white man is poor and needs help. But she decides that he should get help from “one of his own kind”. She refers him to a white lawyer.
Sherrod’s racist tale is received by the NAACP audience with nodding approval and murmurs of recognition and agreement. Hardly the behavior of the group now holding itself up as the supreme judge of another groups’ racial tolerance."

Posted by: djslaughter | July 22, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

...be serious

he's suffered no more than Bill O'Reily has suffered behind this.

Certainly a lot less than Glen Beck has suffered behind this. Where it has been established that the mere fear of merely being mentioned by him is such a big deal.

You're asking whether this is a bad thing for them as a journalist, to be taken seriously for hysterical comments? LOL

Posted by: dubya1938 | July 22, 2010 2:46 PM | Report abuse

LOL. I love the liberal media discovering the concept of journalistic ethics only yesterday. The hypocrisy is laughable. Conservatives get smeared as racists every day, but heaven forbid a liberal get caught up in their own slimy tactics.

Sargent is a partisan joke.

Posted by: bobmoses | July 22, 2010 2:49 PM | Report abuse

"I am one of your biggest fan President Obama but I am losing respect for you because you haven't figured out yet that it has long been time to start kicking some asses. COME ON!!!"

Why would you lose respect for him as a result of this? Has Obama ever been known as the kind of guy who would "kick some ass"?

You realize that if that were the case they wouldn't let him within 500 feet of the White House? He'd probably be in some Chicago jail right now.

Posted by: dubya1938 | July 22, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

"Is it just me, or did fox news take all of their comments offline? Every story now has a NaN in place of the amount of comments, and there are no comments."

LOL do you expect me to know what is going on over at Fox news?

I wouldn't know a thing about it if it wasn't mentioned in mainstream media LOL

Posted by: dubya1938 | July 22, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Will it affect Breitbart? Since this selective video editing (aka lying) has been going on for some time by a great many members of our "news" media. Sean Hannity works it practically every night. But do they get called on it in any meaningful way? No, and Breitbart will be hailed as a hero by the right. But then again so are Ollie North and G. Gordon Liddy, suitable company.

Posted by: curtb | July 22, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Exactly how much more damage can be done to an avowed lying, racist scumbag blogger?

Posted by: vztownes | July 22, 2010 3:02 PM | Report abuse

Because if the media criticized Breitbart, by extension they would have to examine their own role in this whole mess. They would have to address why they didn't bother to track down the original video before reporting the story. Instead, they have chosen to focus on chastising the White House and the Agriculture Department. I never ceased to be amazed at how unwilling the media is to examine its own failings.

Posted by: jayelle5 | July 22, 2010 3:02 PM | Report abuse

"If this incident were just about putting a know-it-all in his place...why refer to race at all?"

Because, Willy, you typing brainstem, HER ENTIRE STORY WAS ABOUT PUTTING ASIDE RACIAL ANIMOSITY. The people in the audience laughed because they - like all of us - have dealt with people just like this before. People who show up with a chip on their shoulder, convinced that you aren't either competent or smart enough to help them. They, like anyone else not looking to paint everything as "reverse racism" laughed at the idea of a know-it-all being sent packing.

You know, there are lots of scenes in movies, on TV shows, etc of people like this being handled in just this manner, and we all laugh at them. Only poor little oppressed white bigots like you seek to assign some deep racial prejudice to every anecdote. And I'll note again: these folks had already heard how the story ended - because Mrs. Sherrod had introduced it as something that was a "teaching moment" for herself. They already knew there was going to be a turnaround to the evil racist Mrs. Sherrod sending the poor oppressed white farmer packing.

I know I shouldn't expect you to have the ability to reason through that.

Posted by: JennOfArk | July 22, 2010 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Clearly, Breitbart is a con man without any morals, and just as clearly, Fox "news" was only too happy to enable him.

But we all knew what liars they are, don't we?

It's high time that the rest of the corporate media look at its own laziness and lack of standards. They were asleep at the wheel as George Bush lied us into the Iraq war, and the way they have bumbled through this story shows us that they haven't improved one bit.

Posted by: losthorizon10 | July 22, 2010 3:05 PM | Report abuse

...I have to admit, if I were obama I wouldn't have touched this with a 10-foot pole.

The woman put herself in this mess by even speaking in front of the NAACP. Then her boss got wind of that and decided to give her the bum-rush. I would have let him sink or swim on that decision. Indeed I think that it was a valid decision: once she gets in the media spotlight every decision that she makes every act that she takes is now a matter of public discussion. It *does* undermine her credibility and by extension the credibility of her office, and of the USDA at large. I still think that asking for her resignation was the right move.

Does she deserve to be fired? that's a different story. But is she qualified for her position, much less a leadership position in the USDA? I don't think that that can honestly be said.

She's going to get *support*, but I don't see that as meaning that she should be high in the USDA bureaucracy. So I think that you're going to see a lot of "backwash" on this: a lot of people saying that it was sad what happened, "certainly not idea" but the final chapter on this has hardly been written. If she gets a job it certainly won't be her *old* job. Even if it has the same title they're going to bury her.

And then of course you're going to have large #s of people calling her for help, with their farm, with their house, with whatever. It sounds like her best bet is to take a non-profit job, or a job with a law firm. She's going to be too radioactive for a government job.

Posted by: dubya1938 | July 22, 2010 3:06 PM | Report abuse

I hope it has diminished him because obviously until the "reputable" media stops gloming stories from these racist trash barrels, we will continue to have this slanted, demeaning, divisive, rancorous drivel served to us as we try to extract the the limited number of real facts from the flotage.

Posted by: poppysue85 | July 22, 2010 3:09 PM | Report abuse

The MSM does this every day how about the tea party picture of the guy with the gun and they edited out the arms of the man bcause he was black but didn't want you to know that or the Israel troops when they edited out the knife that the attackers had in there hands beating the Israelies up
trying to inspect the ships this is very over rated and shouldn't be a big story.

Posted by: samuellenn | July 22, 2010 3:11 PM | Report abuse

A question for Greggie Sargent and the rest of the left wing agenda promoting state run media - does continuing to employ partisan hacks like yourself and Ezra Klein damage the reputation of the Washington ComPost? What about your old "Horse's Mouth" blog where you actually tried to convince people there was no leftist slant or bias? Sorry Greggie - we've been on to your kind for many years, and now the rest of Americans who never bothered to care have seen what you are all about. Simple really - the media hacks are an easy way for liberal politicians to get around Federal Election laws. Gee, I wonder if there are any emails out there which can tie leftist politicians to media hacks and show collusion...I'm sure there will be some violation of FEC regulations somewhere. If there is, I bet Breitbart will pay a pretty penny for the evidence...roflmao

Posted by: ihatethepost1 | July 22, 2010 3:11 PM | Report abuse

...then the larger questions will remain: what exactly does the USDA do that is such a big deal. What does she do now for the USDA, and what has she been doing for the past 24 years.

Why was she helping these white farmers while working for an organization that was supposed to be helping black farmers. Was it really "racism" or her simply maintaining focus?

Why did these people have to even get in touch with her to file a Chapter11 and avoid losing their farm in foreclosure?

There should be a whole bunch of questions that come out of this.

Posted by: dubya1938 | July 22, 2010 3:12 PM | Report abuse

Breaitbart should be publicly flogged for creating the mess. He should fear for his safety in crowds.

Posted by: anarcho-liberal-tarian | July 22, 2010 3:14 PM | Report abuse

"I graduated from a very good journalism school. Ball State’s program is not the equal of Northwestern’s or Missouri’s, but I feel quite comfortable that I understand the role of journalists.
Journalists are not trained to be attack dogs for morally bankrupt institutions."

Hey Greg...if a sports journalist like Jason Whitlock understands his role as 'the press,' then why can you highly educated ivy league elitists figuree it out?

Posted by: PanhandleWilly | July 22, 2010 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Obama's accomplisments are his failers he only passes things he wants not what the American people want every big thing he has passed they did with over 60% of opposition thats where the line Fundimentally Chance America comes from, but fortunately it's only working against him.

Posted by: samuellenn | July 22, 2010 3:20 PM | Report abuse

What I don't understand, is how any media outlet, even FOX, can rely on Andrew Breitbart for anything. This is the guy who was responsible for the pimp/hooker video to discredit ACORN and the Tea Party video to refute claims of racial slurs being used against black politicians. In both cases it was proven that these videos were false and doctored. I mean come on guys.

Posted by: jcollell | July 22, 2010 3:21 PM | Report abuse

samuellenn - judging by actual polls of what people think and your post, it's clearly only working against him with the illiterate.

Not that they aren't a large group of people.

Posted by: JennOfArk | July 22, 2010 3:23 PM | Report abuse

The Libs are trying to spin (fabricate) this story around Breitbart. Message is simple - The NAACP is falsely righteous. So the Libs need to muck up the results. The Libs love asymetrical warfare. Plus their own fabrications. When it suits them. They want freedom to bash with the racism "j'accuse." But the chickens are coming home to roost. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. The Libs made their bed. Now they are complaining about having to sleep in it.

Posted by: Typhon | July 22, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Because, Willy, you typing brainstem, HER ENTIRE STORY WAS ABOUT PUTTING ASIDE RACIAL ANIMOSITY.

oppressed white bigots like you

So I guess the often highlighted complaint about libbies is true. As soon as they can no longer argue a point effectively they turn to personal attacks. Not much different than "Ackermanning" somebody...don't like the message...call em' a racist. Jenn you're not only delusional...it's self-inflicted delusion.

Posted by: PanhandleWilly | July 22, 2010 3:26 PM | Report abuse

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Burros + 21st century = Andrew Breitbart

Posted by: misterjrthed | July 22, 2010 3:38 PM | Report abuse

The same fools who paid attention to Breitbart before this will still be paying attention after it, count on that. Right Wingers hate facts, so the bigger liar you are the better off you'll be within their party.

Posted by: blazertaco | July 22, 2010 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for asking this question, Greg.

Until the legitimate media distances itself from the likes of Fox News and Breitbart, they will continue to damage themselves by association.

Rachel Maddow did another stellar job on this story last night and seems to be one of the very few journalists who are willing to call out Fox News by name.

Gibbs was asked if the administration is afraid of the conservative media, and yet it appears the actual people who are scared of Fox News are their so-called media colleagues.

As someone here pointed out yesterday, CNN's Ed Henry actually is advocating to give Fox News a front-row seat in the WH briefing room.

There is a huge story here about who got that tape of Mrs. Sherrod and who doctored it. Since Breitbart is lying and feigning innocence about the tape, it's now a prime investigative story who some real journalist who has the courage to nail him.

I suggest The New Yorker take it on as penance for that huge profile they did on him.

Posted by: elscott | July 22, 2010 3:45 PM | Report abuse

How's that "Fox Nation" thing working out, bamas?

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!! Teabagger, sheep shagger, baa-baa-baa!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!

Yeagh!

Posted by: bs2004 | July 22, 2010 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Damage Breitbart? Brietbart has a heart as pure as Krupp steel.

Posted by: Keesvan | July 22, 2010 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Hey look, bs2004 = Breitbart himself

Posted by: blazertaco | July 22, 2010 3:55 PM | Report abuse

Was Breitbart standing next to Sherrod when she made the speech. Did Breitbart tell Sherrod what to say. Was he there with Sherrod when she denied the farmer the full force of her job. Did Breitbart put those words in Sherrod mouth. Did Breitbart tell Sherrod to play the racist for the NAACP. What was taken out of context? The first part of the speech or the second part. The what? The second part which clearly shows Sherrod to be the racist she is. The second part of her speech erases any attempt to say the first part of her speech was a teachable moment.

Posted by: houstonian | July 22, 2010 3:57 PM | Report abuse

I would expect that, now that Breitbart has shown his hand as a credulous flack more than once, future responses will be along the lines of "We are investigating the situation, but we don't expect much substance in yet another attack from Breitbart."

Posted by: ScienceTim | July 22, 2010 3:58 PM | Report abuse

I don't understand,

haven't from the first report.

Breitbart IS the story. It is his edited to falsehood story that brought abou the whole thing.

That's unusual? Well, everybody in the press thought the phony story so obviously
what it seemed, no one checked.

There is was, many of us saw it early. What was there to not believe?

A faultless editing job...a brilliant idea to cut up the story to make it opposite of it's reality.

And still we hear all last night and today that it's Ag's fault. The WH's fault. The hell it was.

It was a deliberate Breitbart to Fox campaign.

TO HELP FUEL THE ANTI BLACK THING THE TEA PARTY IS DOING.

AND IT DID STOP, AGAIN BRILLIANTLY, THE STORIES ABOUT THE JEWS/ISRAELIS/FLOTILLA.

Now, who/what think tanks types could get the new flotilla storis off the front pages. Not that you'd find them in the Post or Times.. Nothing there...just racial screams.

Congratulations to the media manipulators.

Posted by: whistling | July 22, 2010 4:01 PM | Report abuse

Breitbart is another right-wing idiot who thinks that racism by blacks against whites is the greatest and most pervasive social cancer in 21st-century America. The "reverse-racism" canard is just about the last refuge for unrepentant racists like this guy. What Breitbart did was a lot worse than the rantings of Mel Gibson.

Posted by: biograph19851 | July 22, 2010 4:01 PM | Report abuse


Someone tell us why Breitbart ISN't the story.

Since WHEN is the reaction to a lie the story...not the lie.

It's insane how this story has been manipulated. What's going on ?

Posted by: whistling | July 22, 2010 4:05 PM | Report abuse

Propaganda 101: They came for Acorn, then Sotomayor, Van Jones, "New Black Panthers", Sherrod - and I said nothing...

Over and over again, Media Inc. allows the proven-false Fox News, to wag the dog. Which makes it complicit in misinforming it's public.

Stop it.

- Balkingpoints / www

Posted by: RField7 | July 22, 2010 4:07 PM | Report abuse

One could ask the press corps about the WaPo and it's infestation of JournoLista's. I think Breitbart made an error...the same error made by the NAACP and the Administration. The JournoList is substantially more damning to a news organization....especially one that holds itself in such high esteem.

Posted by: twann9852 | July 22, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

So what are you suggesting, Mr. Sargent? That the mainstream media journalists that swallowed Brietbart's story hook line and sinker now criticize him for doing precisely what they did? While I applaud your temerity in asking the question, does "credibility" even matter anymore? Isn't all media, including THE POST, on a race to the bottom like the National Enquirer, where they will say, do, or print anything at all to get an audience?

Posted by: gasmonkey | July 22, 2010 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Does it hurt him? It doesn't help, that's for sure, and by rights, it should be a big hit to his credibility.

But other media outlets ran with it too. It's a big hit for them too. And they can ill-afford to have more people doubting their credibility.

Posted by: ravensfan20008 | July 22, 2010 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Actually, I think you meant to say he received the video edited, not unedited.

This all remeinds me of "Wag the Dog." Reality is whatever the packager of the message wants it to be. Incredibly naive initial reaction by the administration.

Posted by: shoddymill | July 22, 2010 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Way I see it, Breitbart got excerpts from a NAACP speech that showed the black morons hooting approval as Sherrod said she gave a white farmer some comeuppance.
When it got out, an embarassed NAACP, which had the whole tape, contacted a high attorney inside the White House that worked for them once and who they helped place in her Executive postion to demand the White House demand Agriculture fire the woman immediately.

The White House, thinking the NAACP knew what was in the whole tape they had, knee-jerked, and kow-towed to the racist morons at NAACP.

Later, when the tape showed NAACP blacks also hootin and hollerin when Sherrod said God guided her to reconsider her sentiments about the white cracker and treat poor people the same...it was clear a horrible mistake was made. Especially once the idiots in the NAACP and White House got Sherrod's full biography.

Rather than blame the NAACP for being too lazy to look at the whole tape they had and to the Obamites for acting without any evidence against the woman (Remember Obama a year ago? "I don't have any details about what happened with Prof Gates, but it is clear the police acted stupidly.")

Naturally, in this sort of fiasco of the holders of the full video of the Sherrod speech (NAACP) demanding firing, Obamites doing so on NAACP word......the Left and progressive Jews of the media saw only one defense.
Blame the "Rightwing media" for showing a portion of the NAACP's tape they got showing black racists cheering a white farmer's misfortune.

Posted by: ChrisFord1 | July 22, 2010 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Gee, I wonder if anyone who uses Breitbart to reinforce their view of the world actually cares if anything he says is really true.

Posted by: daweeni | July 22, 2010 4:37 PM | Report abuse

why would it? He's an instigator and he's made his point: Folks in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. I accept his version that this was aimed at the NAACPs resolution claiming the Tea Party was racist.

Whether it is or not isn't event the question, (!) if the NAACP wants to waste its time playing in the mud, making vague, unsubstantiated comments, well two can play also. The result is that the NAACP has mud on its face for being stupid, not even bothering to look at a tape that was in their possession. No, it didn't prove they are racists - give or take what you think they are laughing at - stupid, racists? what's the difference? It means that the NAACP has wasted a week of its convention playing media games instead of any substantive work.

Posted by: jhtlag1 | July 22, 2010 4:37 PM | Report abuse

This is Breitbart's Tijuana Brawley moment. The only difference was that Al Sharpton was actually successful in ruining someone's life.

Breitbart couldn't even get THAT right.

Posted by: Please_Fix_VAs_Roads | July 22, 2010 4:39 PM | Report abuse

It seems simple to me, Greg. All you and other commentators have to do is call out Breitbart on his cheap, race-baiting tactics, and point out the fact that he and his ilk contribute exactly zero to any reasoned political discussion, and then never mention him again. If you have any intellectual integrity yourself, you should have no problem dispensing with Breitbart's continued stream of innuendos and half-truths. It's time to stop acting as if rumor-mongering bloggers are the equal of objectivity-seeking journalists. Which side of this divide are you on, Greg?

Posted by: bradpi | July 22, 2010 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Greg....THIS is the question every so called professional journalist should be hounding Breitbart with:

"Who gave you the tape?"

Whoever edited it was acting with malice aforethought. They deliberately altered its message to smear Sherrod.

Who are they Andrew and what is their affiliation?

Also...your involvement in ACORN smear and now this raise serious questions about your qualifications. It's at least the second time you have launched a major news story that turned out to be a carefully crafted smear. Are you a journalist or a propagandist?

Posted by: dweb8231 | July 22, 2010 4:41 PM | Report abuse

I would love to be on the jury that awards Sherrod a huge financial award from Breitbart for his intentional and malicious defamation of Sherrod's character.

Posted by: jjedif | July 22, 2010 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Bottom line, Breitbart, the NAACP, and the Obama Administration all made the same mistake.

They all only saw a portion of the tape.

Breitbart and some commentators aired it and said, "My this doesn't look good!"

The NAACP racists, who had the full tape but were too lazy to watch it, called the White House and demanded Sherrod's firing because the NAACP members cheering about a white farmers troubles made Sherrod a race traitor for embarassing them. And something had to be done - immediately! As it made the NAACP look bad.

The Obama Administration saluted the noble NAACP and said "Yessir, yessir, three bags full! We'll fire her as soon as we are off the phone and Black Messiah gives us the "thumbs down" on her." And no need to check evidence before trashing a civil service employee, not when the great vaunted civil rights organization said they had all the evidence they needed?

And of course, after this latest White House - NAACP cluster grope? (NAACP involved with the White HOuse on racist Cambridge cops, dropping charges on the Panthers through a Deputy WH Counsel that once headed NAACP Legal Action Committee, involved in false claims made by lying black Congresscritters that crowds were calling them the N-Word)

Who is at fault?

To the Left, the progressive Jews who run much of US media - to the NAACP who demanded she be immediately fired and the Obamites who took it on like good NAACP lackey boys...of course, only one group COULD be at fault.

The conservative media, of course. It's ALL their fault. They ran a piece of video from an NAACP get together and opined "my, this sure doesn't make the NAACP look better than the blacks whoopin and hollerin when Rev Wright was screaming G-D America".

In this, special credit goes to not only Mrs Sherrod..but also for Sec of Agriculture Tom Vilisack manfully covering up for Black Messiah and his White House bozos. Vilisack went out and said "it was all his idea." Not since brave men protected Reagan in Iran-Contra and brave women feminists fell on their swords to give Clinton the Lewinsky exception to sexual exploitation of a subordinate has a subordinate sacrificed as nobly.

Posted by: ChrisFord1 | July 22, 2010 4:47 PM | Report abuse

You know what, I think Breitbart was a member of JournoList!

Well, WP ran that news making group, they should be able to tell us!

Posted by: theaz | July 22, 2010 4:48 PM | Report abuse

Breitbart's credibility, always an ephemeral thing, disappeared entirely after the magnificently ginned up ACORN fiasco. Yet the media continues to give him a platform from which to spew his drivel. Like Drudge, he is at the cutting edge of the wingnut echo chamber, and conservatives will spin like driedls to rescue him. Witness today's screed from the ethically challenged Ann Coulter, seeking to portray BREITBART as the victim in all this--and ignoring the person he so casually smeared. Never apologize, never admit wrongdoing--whine and whine and THEN make everyone else accountable--Republicans at their very best. He's now 2 for 2 at deliberately editing video to tell the exact opposite story. Those who defend him are cowards and hypocrites.

Posted by: bklyndan22 | July 22, 2010 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Even better - can she file a lawsuite against Breitbart for runing her life?

That is the only real way to get at and hurt the trolls like Breitbart who inhabit the netherworld of the republican far right - go after their money!

They will really start to howl then.

ka-ching!

Posted by: alfa73 | July 22, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

"I would love to be on the jury that awards Sherrod a huge financial award from Breitbart for his intentional and malicious defamation of Sherrod's character.
Posted by: jjedif"

Great idea, but is was lazy racists at NAACP that couldn't be bothered to look at the whole tape before calling the White House and demanding her firing for "forcing black racists in attendence to cheer about a white farmer in tribulations getting some comuppance from a wise. powerful black woman.
And it was the White House that expose the Executive to civil action for firing her w/o cause. As the saying goes, "They FU-ked up. They trusted the NAACP."

Breitbart, at worse, just aired an unaltered segment of a speech sent to him.

Lefty and progressive Jew squealing to ignore the Obamites and NAACP and attack the messenger instead is laughable theater.

Posted by: ChrisFord1 | July 22, 2010 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Anyone remember what happened to Dan Rather with those forged Bush memos?? At least he tried to do due dilligence but his "experts" were wrong. Breitbart' simply did not care if the tape was edited - he didn't care that the ACORN tapes were doctored either. He is not a "journalist" - he is a political hack and not a very good on at that. He should lose his job since he has no credibility.

Posted by: sux123 | July 22, 2010 4:57 PM | Report abuse

"Breitbart, at worse, just aired an unaltered segment of a speech sent to him. "

And what does that make him? Answer: NOT a journalist. Certainly not someone you can trust to give you the whole story.

Compare with this statement: Dan Rather, at worst, just aired an unaltered document sent to him.

Will the indignant right go after Breitbart with the same fervor (in the name of journalistic integrity and accountability) as they did with Dan Rather? *crickets*

Posted by: leftcoaster | July 22, 2010 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Funny article that parodies Breitbart as the Jon Lovitz pathological liar. Problem is, it's accurate - http://wp.me/pNmlT-io

Posted by: dh1976 | July 22, 2010 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Breitbart might have lose some credibility on this issue had the White House not stepped in to lose a lot more and to make the story about the White House instead of about Breitbart. Had the White House simply waited a day to decide about firing Sherrod, the full video would have surfaced, and the main person with egg on his face would have been Breitbart, with the rest of the media who ran with the story also receiving some collateral splatter. The case raises a few questions about how much journalistic responsibility bloggers have compared to traditional media, but certainly Breitbart should have lost some credibility.

As it has played out, however, the White House took all of the embarrassment. Breitbart may lose a minuscule amount of credibility, while the White House has lost much, much more. Gibbs has been working hard to point the finger back at the media, but it wasn't the media who fired Sherrod. It was the White House. Is the White House so afraid of the media that it cannot wait a day to investigate a video? Is the White House so shameless that it blames the media for the White House's own error in firing someone? Yeah, the media didn't do their research on this one, but the media, for all of their grandstanding about public duty and responsibility, are not elected officials. We elected Obama to keep a cool head in the White House and to make clear, rational decisions. Instead, he's firing people at the drop of a hat because a video, which even Glenn Beck pointed out appeared to be taken out of context, showed up on a conservative blogger's website. Sorry, but this isn't what we elect public servants to do, and it's not how the White House should behave.

Posted by: blert | July 22, 2010 5:04 PM | Report abuse

jhtlag1: "I accept his version that this was aimed at the NAACPs resolution claiming the Tea Party was racist."

You accept that in spite of the fact that the NAACP's resolution explicitly said the Tea Party is not a racist organization?

Posted by: leftcoaster | July 22, 2010 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Breitbart has done America a much needed service. He has reminded us not to believe ANYTHING we see on Fox, ever.

Posted by: m_richert | July 22, 2010 5:08 PM | Report abuse

No matter what or how planet liberal spins this,she still made racist comments and it was their own Obama and the NAACP that never bothered to check things out before they threw one of their own under the bus.The lemmings only have themselves to blame.I know,lets cry racist to stop americans from focusing on Obama and the Dem's total ineptness.I know I know it's Bushes fault.Cmon November and 2012!!

Posted by: votingrevolution | July 22, 2010 5:09 PM | Report abuse

"As soon as they can no longer argue a point effectively they turn to personal attacks."

Willy - the point was argued effectively - if the person on the other side had a functioning brain. Since you don't, since even after the facts are presented to you you continue to pretend that there is some huge "scandal" in the audience's reaction to a speech that was prefaced with the speaker's assertion that things turned out well in the end, I have to conclude you're LOOKING for a reason to claim "black racism" when none is in evidence. Since no one would attempt to do this unless they had an agenda, I have to conclude you have an agenda. And since the agenda which comports most closely with "in every case, portray black people in the worst light possible, and interpret their actions in the worst light possible" is the RACIST agenda, I have to conclude that you are a BIGOT. That's not "name-calling", that's what's known as "accurately describing the thing for what it is," or more simply, honesty.

Sorry if it makes ya look bad. Maybe if you didn't insist on looking at things through the lens of your bigotry, no one would call you a bigot.

Posted by: JennOfArk | July 22, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Why should it matter? Truth is not a Republican value. Power is what matters. Lies have proven to be an effective tactic. The Republicans share this characteristic with many of the extremists who have caused so much agony for human civilization.

Mr. Breitbart makes a good living lying and repeating lies. If he were interested in truth, he wouldn't be a right-wing extremist in the first place.

Posted by: tboyer33 | July 22, 2010 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Is the guy that played the part of the pimp in the ACCORN case in jail or awaiting trial for tampering with the congress person's telephone gear?

You guys prolly remember when right wingers like Rove and Breitbart didn't like ACORN be cause ACCORN was helping people register to vote that republican vote counters though would not vote GOP.

Rove's part included having Federal Attorneys removed for not going after people who help registar voters.

Posted by: Emmetrope | July 22, 2010 5:14 PM | Report abuse

By looking at the polls the only one it's hurting is the so called "black caucus"NAACP,and Obama.They have cried wolf about racist so many times no one believes them or takes them serious anymore they are now irrelevant,and rightfully so!!!

Posted by: votingrevolution | July 22, 2010 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Is the guy that played the part of the pimp in the ACCORN case in jail or awaiting trial for tampering with the congress person's telephone gear?

You guys prolly remember when right wingers like Rove and Breitbart didn't like ACORN be cause ACCORN was helping people register to vote that republican vote counters though would not vote GOP.

Rove's part included having Federal Attorneys removed for not going after people who help registar voters.

Posted by: Emmetrope | July 22, 2010 5:15 PM | Report abuse

"...she still made racist comments..."

My my my...here's another example on someone unclear of the meaning of words.

She didn't make "racist comments". She never called the white farmer a "cracker" or a "honky" or even a "white devil". She described him as a white farmer.

She then went on to describe her own thoughts and actions in relation to the white farmer, more specifically, in relation to the general attitude she thought he had with her, admitting that those thoughts and actions were influenced by racial bias.

Those aren't "racist statements". Those are part of a storyline which led to "I was wrong."

I think you rightwingers trolling here need to step back and ask yourselves WHY you think that this one woman's self-admitted racially biased thoughts and actions of 25 years ago, which were also atoned for 25 years ago, equals "Shirley Sherrod is History's Greatest Monster." If you were smart people, you'd refrain from flinging about accusations about who the REAL racists are until you figured out why you're so eaten up with some minor events from 25 years ago which were redressed at the time.

Posted by: JennOfArk | July 22, 2010 5:20 PM | Report abuse

Breitbart is a pathological liar. Why will the media not state the obvious.

Posted by: fishman2 | July 22, 2010 5:22 PM | Report abuse

I think the media has completely missed the story about Breitbart and has focused on the quick reaction from the NAACP and the Administration.

Breitbart should NEVER be taken seriously again. There's a big difference between Obama bashing and manufacturing news. He has no ethics. He edited the ACORN tapes to mislead and now this.

On the quick reaction - I can understand it considering the poisoned climate created by Fox and Followers regarding race. Obama has been accused of hating white people, Rush blathers on about reparations. The NAACP is called a racist organization. If they hadn't taken quick action, they would have been vilified. I don't like it but I understand it.

The Right is very clever though in how they turned the story around from looking at what Brietbart did AGAIN to the Administration and the NAACP. The media is going along with it perhaps because they would have to report on how wrong they were in the role they played in this story.

Posted by: FauxReal | July 22, 2010 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Read Breitbart's article with the video and you will see it is the NAACP member audience which is the topic, not the lady speaking....

...Obama tossed her under the bus before anyone read the article which addresses the audience's laughter, not the speaker's comments.

Either way the urban myth that "blacks cannot be racist" has been exploded.

Posted by: georgedixon1 | July 22, 2010 5:37 PM | Report abuse

This guy and credibility don't belong in the same room. Credibility? Yea, the whole ACORN scam that proved nothing more than a conservative with hunt....credibility??

This guy is a loser with a capital "R" - for Republican, of course.

Posted by: ScottChallenger | July 22, 2010 5:49 PM | Report abuse

"By looking at the polls the only one it's hurting is the so called "black caucus"NAACP,and Obama.They have cried wolf about racist so many times"

Obama never called anyone a racist. The NAACP explicitly said the Tea Party is not a racist organization, and called on them to expel racists within their ranks. The response from the Tea Party Express leadeer was recognized as racist by the Tea Party Federation and he was expelled. That is NOT crying wolf.

On the other hand, Glenn Beck called Obama a racist without any evidence. Breitbart called the NAACP racist and provided a misleadingly edited tape as proof. That IS crying wolf!

Get your facts straight.

Posted by: leftcoaster | July 22, 2010 5:51 PM | Report abuse

Breitbart "says" he received an unedited tape. Did he or did he edit the tape to show what he wanted it to show? We'll never know the truth because (i) we'll never learn the source, and (ii) Anything Breitbart says in his defense is obviously self serving. The guy couldn't even apologize for God's sake.

Posted by: Freethotlib | July 22, 2010 5:51 PM | Report abuse

"Either way the urban myth that "blacks cannot be racist" has been exploded."

Posted by: georgedixon1

----------------------

Nobody ever said blacks cannot be racist. The debate is whether there are racists in the Tea Party (this has been confirmed by the Tea Party itself, and to their credit they have expelled racists) and Breitbart's counter-charge that the NAACP is a racist organization.

Posted by: leftcoaster | July 22, 2010 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Racist fake Journalist on Fox Fake News are safe and Breitbart is safe because rich Racist like Mr. Koch are shelling out billions to destroy Obama/USA. Many of the Tea Party have no idea the KKK has joined in the group and other racist groups are using their name. With racist taking over it's hard for the Jewish Law Makers to join as as the Racist don't like them either. Breitbart was paid very well and so are many from the Press and Media. Van Jones was set up and it worked and there will be more victims and the lies are reported to the public as truth.

Posted by: qqbDEyZW | July 22, 2010 5:57 PM | Report abuse

It was only a matter of time before the teabaggers had to start defending this muckraker. He knew exactly what he was doing, so did faux news when all their propaganda minions like Billo jumped on this smear campaign.

Posted by: maxisgod | July 22, 2010 5:57 PM | Report abuse

No. After the "double-secret racism" incident, all I saw was a bunch of leftist apologists trying to get their tongues out of their shoelaces. It was actually quite refreshing...

Posted by: Apostrophe | July 22, 2010 6:03 PM | Report abuse

Breitbart's no muckraker. Muckspreader, on the other hand . . .

Posted by: mattintx | July 22, 2010 6:05 PM | Report abuse

"Since no one would attempt to do this unless they had an agenda,"

The only agenda is honesty...when you take off the blinders and want to admit what every one who saw this already knows...let us all know.

Posted by: PanhandleWilly | July 22, 2010 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Bottom line: NAACP was proven correct and the conservatives were caught manufacturing evidence to support false charges.

Posted by: leftcoaster | July 22, 2010 6:23 PM | Report abuse

My guess for the unnamed White House staffer is Rahm since no one else could tell the Ag. secy to move on this. Good to see the blame was not placed on "callers" and went to an apologetic cabinet post. The GOP made Scooter take the hit for the Cheney conspirators in the Plame outing affair, but really should have had congress subpoena the E-mails from national security committees where exec privilege does not apply. Sherrod should name her new position and be the undersec'y in charge of reviewing denied application appeals.

Posted by: jameschirico | July 22, 2010 6:25 PM | Report abuse

Here's what I know: people laugh at this type of stuff all the time. In movies, when someone tells them about it. Most people have had to at one point or another deal with a difficult person who thought they knew it all and yet for some reason were relying on us to help them. And who made sure we knew how they felt about us. Many of us, in this type of situation, do less of a good job than we are capable of doing. All of us can relate to someone else being in that position, and share a kind of vicarious joy in whatever steps they took in regards to AI (***hole intervention). That's a HUMAN trait that has NOTHING to do with race.

Except of course when it's a bunch of black folks laughing about a story about a white man, when they already knew the story had a good ending. Then of course it proves they're all a bunch of racists out to kill whitey.

Right? I mean, history's greatest monsters and all of that.

For anyone who may be interested, I've posted the "shorter" Fox, Breitbart, and MSM rationalization about the whole Sherrod thing over at my blog. If you want to see, it's here: http://3weirdsisters.wordpress.com

Posted by: JennOfArk | July 22, 2010 6:34 PM | Report abuse

Execrably sloppy journalism and you need to ask? If it were anyone but a right winger he'd be finished for life. But telli g the truth isn't even a tertiary priority for the right. All that counts is gotcha.

Truth is a casualty of the conservative revolution, and a very early one.

Posted by: Noacoler | July 22, 2010 6:41 PM | Report abuse

"Truth is a casualty of the conservative revolution, and a very early one."

I thought Ackerman was a liberal?

Posted by: PanhandleWilly | July 22, 2010 6:47 PM | Report abuse

How can you damage someone who has no morals, no shame, and no journalistic standards. Even talking about him helps him. Best to pull the level and flush him down where he belongs. He is a savage degenerate animal.

Posted by: cythera45 | July 22, 2010 6:52 PM | Report abuse

Nope - it didn't damage Breibart , but it is another nail into the Barack Obama coffin - once again he went off half-cacked and made a fool of himself. This last incident proves Hillary's point when during the campaign she asked her famous question about reacting to an early morning phone call. Obama is not a leader and in way in over his head, as the midterm elections will make very, very clear.

Posted by: Realist201 | July 22, 2010 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Nope - it didn't damage Breibart , but it is another nail into the Barack Obama coffin - once again he went off half-cacked and made a fool of himself. This last incident proves Hillary's point when during the campaign she asked her famous question about reacting to an early morning phone call. Obama is not a leader and in way in over his head, as the midterm elections will make very, very clear.

Posted by: Realist201 | July 22, 2010 6:59 PM | Report abuse

As far as I'm concerned MSM has not and will not admit their part in this lie.

Breitbart and Fox are race baiters but the MSM keeps reporting their lies (Sherrod; ACORN; Van Jones criminal history; birth certificate; Pres. Obama's childhood schooling; death camps; Michelle Obama 'whitey'; etc., etc.,) as if they are truths.

MSM don't necessarily create the lies but they help perpetuate the lies.

Instead of reporting and fact checking MSM just says "so and so is reporting". MSM your job is to report and fact check.

Posted by: jlr6111 | July 22, 2010 7:05 PM | Report abuse

Breitbart is no different than any Fox person. He is a racist and a liar.....which you have to be to work at Fox Noise. They are sickening and I will never watch them.

Posted by: tuttlegroup | July 22, 2010 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Breitbart is no different than any Fox person. He is a racist and a liar.....which you have to be to work at Fox Noise. They are sickening and I will never watch them.

Posted by: tuttlegroup | July 22, 2010 7:20 PM | Report abuse

Was there anything about Breitbart to damage? He is clearly a right wing nut. He was that before and he remains that. So I must conclude that he wasn't damaged.

Posted by: jimeglrd8 | July 22, 2010 7:22 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for your definition of Breitbart's Disease!

Editors reviewed your entry and have decided to publish it on urbandictionary.com.

It should appear on this page in the next few days:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Breitbart%27s%20Disease

Urban Dictionary

-----

Breitbart's Disease

A painful inflammation of the scrotum, caused by a fungus resulting from poor hygiene. Also known as "Rancid Nutsack".
Some professionals insist that it is NOT caused by poor hygiene, but by poor mental processes, as exhibited by members of the Tea Party.

The Fox News host was clearly agitated, possibly as a result of his Breitbart's Disease.

Posted by: TOMHERE | July 22, 2010 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Oh let me get this straight. This inept administration jumped the gun and did not do any research. The AG Secretary fell on the sword for this inept administration and did not do his homework. Enter the racist NAACP who had the tape in their possession and too stupid to look at it. Ms. Shirley shows tendencies to see life through race tainted glasses and needs some soul searching. And of course, lazy people cannot take the blame for their stupidity and want to blame it on Fox news that did not air the story until Shirley was fired. And Beitbart used part of a tape like the state press does everyday to people all over this nation.
I am so sick of these radical wackies and cannot wait to vote these know nothings out of office who pit people against people thinking they can gain political power in their perverted evil minds.

Posted by: greatgran1 | July 22, 2010 7:29 PM | Report abuse

The Breitbart scandal will make no real difference.

Reasonable people already know that Fox is the propaganda arm of the GOP, and that this is just one more sickening example of their dishonesty.

And the people who still watch Fox will never reject the GOP/Teabaggers, no matter how many lies they spew. They will ignore this latest tawdriness because to do otherwise would threaten their narrative that its the whole rest of the world that lies, not Fox.

Posted by: wagner3792 | July 22, 2010 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Maybe this was the reason to clear the decks. Just in case you missed it!!!

Minority Farm Settlement

Justice Achieved - Congratulations to Shirley and Charles Sherrod!

We have wonderful news regarding the case of New Communities, Inc., the land trust that Shirley and Charles Sherrod established, with other black farm families in the 1960's. At the time, with holdings of almost 6,000 acres, this was the largest tract of black-owned land in the country.


Posted by: ZebZ | July 22, 2010 7:40 PM | Report abuse

The whole rightwing "media" thing has gone too far. Murdoch, admittedly a genius, has invented an entirely new animal, "fake news", which promotes rabble-rousing and falsehood in an area traditionally set aside as exempt from oversight. He's using the first amendment as a screen for overt rightwing propaganda.

I'm not sure of the solution, and whatever it is, it's not censorship, but there needs to be an evolution in media to segregate hard news from the 21st century equivalent of whipping up a lynch mob.

Posted by: info53 | July 22, 2010 7:41 PM | Report abuse

Once again, the right wing is caught lying and their conduit, Fox news happily spreads the lie.
And once again, A Democrat bows to their BS.

Repeat this scenario over and over gain and you have US politics from 1981 til today in a nutshell.

Posted by: dwdave67 | July 22, 2010 7:41 PM | Report abuse

Breitbart is an indispensable, indestructible truth-telling SUPERHERO in a time when the lamestream media flatly REFUSES to do its job.

Posted by: thebump | July 22, 2010 7:49 PM | Report abuse

Did the Sherrod story damage Breitbart?

Does crawling in the dirt damage a snake?

Posted by: arancia12 | July 22, 2010 7:53 PM | Report abuse

"indestructible truth-telling SUPERHERO"

We shall see how how indestructible he is after getting caught in an outright lie. I'm sure he will retain the part of his audience that values racist ranting over accuracy in reporting, but after the current debacle, nobody's going to refer to him as a "journalist" ever again.

Posted by: info53 | July 22, 2010 7:54 PM | Report abuse

Did the Sherrod story damage Breitbart?

Does crawling in the dirt damage a snake?

Posted by: arancia12 | July 22, 2010 7:54 PM | Report abuse

Nope - it didn't damage Breibart , but it is another nail into the Barack Obama coffin - once again he went off half-cacked and made a fool of himself.
Posted by: Realist201
________________

Half-CACKED? Remind who is making a fool of himself?

Posted by: arancia12 | July 22, 2010 7:56 PM | Report abuse

Breitbart is not the issue. Obama is.

Specifically, the issue is the calculated, cynical strategy of lies, smears, and disinformation by which Obama's operatives have played the race card against any and all who dare criticize his performance or dissent from his disastrous policies.

When Obama's operatives stooped so low as to enlist the current leadership of a venerable institution, the NAACP, the political firestorm ensuing from such a travesty was entirely predictable.

Here's all that matters now: Mr. President, the buck stops with you. Will you, or will you not, tell your supporters in a definitive, categorical, unambiguous directive, once and for all: Cease and desist with their use of the race card.

Posted by: thebump | July 22, 2010 7:57 PM | Report abuse

Sargent you are going after Breitbart ?

He expressed sympathy for Sherrod. He published what he had.. and it was directed at the NAACP participants who wooped and laughed at Sherrod's admitted 20-year-old racism. Not Sherrod herself.

The Real Losers ?

NAACP for panicking and pressing the White House to fire Sherrod... even though they had the full video.

The White House for panicking and FIRING Sherrod.

Winners ?

FOX News for not slamming Sherrod and awaiting the full video details.

Glenn Beck for slamming the White House and NAACP for overkill. Even the New York Times today gave Beck high marks for fairness in an editorial.

Why would you miss the real winners and losers in this sorry spectacle ?

I noted CNN last night and today focused exclusively on Breitbart's role ignoring the White House and the NAACP's shameful roles.

Is Breitbart the Journolists talking-point for dealing with this shameful incident terribly mishandled by the Left ?

Posted by: Petras123 | July 22, 2010 7:58 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Breitbart is a young, white male who has media and attention and is very clever! If he can find any people of color...even a lil bit...and catch them...he will make news and money! So, careful with your tanning salon or sun bathing...you may be next!

Posted by: judithclaire1939 | July 22, 2010 8:04 PM | Report abuse

Here's all you really need to know: Oboobma, Vilsack, and Jealous all found it instantly plausible that an Oboobma appointee could have nonchalantly confessed to blatant discrimination by the Oboobma regime — in front of a room full of people, at an official NAACP function, with the local NAACP president and board in attendance, with the cameras rolling.

Now, why would that be? Why did Oboobma, Vilsack, and Jealous all leap instantly to that conclusion? What does that tell you about where the truth may lie?

Posted by: thebump | July 22, 2010 8:04 PM | Report abuse

“BOYCOTT FOX (FRAUD) NEWS”

Please pass this message to every Liberal and Progressive Website, and tell everyone who cares about this country to help put these LYING LOWLIFE, sorry Excuse of a News Network out of Business….

We as Liberals and Progressives can put an END to this SCUM!!!!!!

Posted by: austininc4 | July 22, 2010 8:06 PM | Report abuse

Moonbat: "We as Liberals and Progressives can put an END to this SCUM!!!!!!" (emphasis and capitalization sic)

Moonbats are so darn tolerant, are they not?

Posted by: thebump | July 22, 2010 8:13 PM | Report abuse

The Breitbart profile in the NYer (May 24) hardly showed a positive side to him or his "work"; in bed with young O'Keefe over the Acorn flap, he made no bones about manufacturing events (e.g., Dems shouting "the N-word" outside his house); the impression the article leaves on its reader is that Breitbart is a 24-hour-a-day rant looking for an ear, an unelected Blagojevich (Illinois ex-governor).
How he might have any credibility eludes me.

Posted by: mini2 | July 22, 2010 8:18 PM | Report abuse

FIRE any reporter (all who covered this story) and ALL EDITORS who permitted such reporters to presented this story as FACT without bothering to carefully examine the obviously highly edited footage, consider its source and conscientiously fact-checked it before releasing it.

There are many young (and mature) journalists out there who actually have some concept of journalistic ethics who'd love to occupy the vacated positions.

Posted by: fr3dmars | July 22, 2010 8:24 PM | Report abuse

PANIC! PANIC!

"Jackasses and not Right" whose description is that.

NOVEMBER DESTRUCTION It might be against the law to vote by then.

The "what's left" may give us a 100 week extention

C YA wouldn't wanta Bee ya

Posted by: JennieT1 | July 22, 2010 8:52 PM | Report abuse

The thing is that this is a right wing source and they are held to a different standard. The truth doesn't matter for this type of GOP attack, the only thing that matters is the effect. It didn't matter that there were no death panels or that John Kerry served bravely in Vietnam, all that mattered was a good story and a smear. The only thing amazing here is that anyone cares that it wasn't true; usually the media covers itself by asking both sides for comment and printing the slime as though it has veracity.
Oh well, how is Lohan doing in stir?

Posted by: ThomasFiore | July 22, 2010 8:53 PM | Report abuse

The only story is that Breitbart has shown he is the present day incarnation of Joseph Goebbels. One who is willing to utilize whatever means, including outright deception, he believes necessary to achieve his objective. Even if that means manufacturing a scenario that is virtually certain to injure someone who he knows is innocent.

Obviously many people were misled and overreacted. That was unfortunate and a lesson to be learned though not one about partisanship. The lesson is simply this:

Fool me once, shame on you; Fool me twice, shame on me.

Ultimately, we all have a choice as to who we listen to. One can and should make wise choices based upon experience. It will bespeak well of you.

Posted by: brwntrt | July 22, 2010 9:06 PM | Report abuse

Frankly, I had never heard of this guy Breitbart until this story. I read the Times and the Post, David Brooks and Frank Rich and men and women of their stature. I do not have the time to follow the questionable musings of neglible pundits who apparently have a very minr connection to the truth.

That said, I read that this guy Breitbart has no plans to apologize and admit that he made a mistake. We all make mistakes but, especially if we are in a position where we are doing commentary that may be read and misread by our readers and our listeners, it is VERY IMPORTANT to admit that you have made a mistake when it is obvious to every thinking person that you have. The fact that Breitbart refuses to do so shows a stunning lack of integrity as well as any sense of fair play. I do not actually know how he communicates because I do not follow him and I certainly will not follow him now. However, if he is on a newsprogram or writes for a newspaper he should be FIRED and if all he is is a blog may he be attacked by hackers until his whole web site implodes.

Posted by: nyrunner101 | July 22, 2010 9:18 PM | Report abuse

Last night on CNN, Breitbart tried to turn the tables on Anderson Cooper inferring that the white farmer and his wife were plants,questioning the networks fact gathering and investigative procedures in this case. This man who admitted he did not see the entire tape tried to blame the whole thing on the NAACP and the administration when he was the one that put out a clearly badly edited tape(you can hear the quality by the difficulty in hearing the speakers words). Everybody seems to forget that breitbart has editied the ACORN tapes The Van Jones Tapes the sen.Landeriu break in and more. Fox has taught its uninformed supporters to REFUDIATE(palin's made up word) facts with talking points so dont expect them to back down. Also they pay posters to flood sites, anybody with a brain can identify a writing style with different nom-de-plumes, the only ones you fool are your likeminded acolytes.

Posted by: jestindam | July 22, 2010 9:26 PM | Report abuse

Anyone who believes this guy in the future is a MORON! It has come out that his ACORN story was Bovine Excretment. Breitbarts moment in the sun is over.

Posted by: johnturkal1 | July 22, 2010 9:44 PM | Report abuse

The media has no problem doing exposes on Tiger Woods, Charlie Rangel, Barry Bonds et al. They let Glenn Beck and Breitbart run amuck ruining lives with little more than wild accusations. If you're white, you're right. The New Yorker should be ashamed. The guy is a psuedo-journalist who does nothing more than dish lies. His hatchet job on ACORN has come home to roost. Shirley Sherrod was the wrong black woman to mess with. What a moron.

Posted by: jpose | July 22, 2010 9:50 PM | Report abuse

Sargent's asked, "Have any high profile traditional media figures come right out and said that Breitbart -- who admitted flat out that he received the Sherrod video unedited and posted it without tracking down the orignal -- has dealt himself a severe blow here?"

Greg, this may come as a surprise, but most of us can reach our own conclusion as to whether Breitbart has any credibility after this incident without being told what to think by a high profile media figure.

Posted by: exco | July 22, 2010 10:06 PM | Report abuse

The beauty of this story is precisely that Breitbart has done exactly what the mainstream media does all the time. He ran with a partial story about racism. Pot calling the kettle black here?! Too funny!

Posted by: jonswitzer | July 22, 2010 10:25 PM | Report abuse

Virtually everyone involved in this media blunder has apologized to Sherrod, except Breitbart. Even Fox and O'Reilly have apologized. This, more than anything else, tells me much about Breitbart. Everyone makes mistakes, but when you feel you cannot admit a mistake, your credibility, no matter how honest you really are, has no foundation. At this point I can only assume Breitbart meant to put the false story out there, or he is too arrogant to admit he goofed. Either way he's not worth a second of my time, and no matter what he offers in the future it will be ignored by me, not because it is false but because I can't trust this guy, and it is all due to his own actions and lack of action.

Posted by: Fate1 | July 22, 2010 10:47 PM | Report abuse

Good LORD. Andrew Breitbart's "credibility"? That was destroyed with the heavily edited and deceptively presented ACORN "pimp" video that he helped promulgate. It seems neither Mr. Sargent nor anyone else in our mainstream media seems aware that the court threw out the ACORN case because the editing of the video was so misleading. Why is our media so asleep on these things?

Posted by: B2O2 | July 22, 2010 11:00 PM | Report abuse

Breitbart did more damage to the credibility of the U.S. media, that uncritically regurgitated his biased slop, than the Sharrod debacle will ever do to Breitbart.

The media has never done its job of fact checking and editing in accepting his sniper journalism and he has banked on the media not doing its job. And rightly so.

The United States mainstream media has completely abandoned its duty to America since George W. Bush was installed in the White House in 2001.

Posted by: aahpat | July 22, 2010 11:44 PM | Report abuse

The problem is, Andrew Breitbart is typical of how Republicans do politics.

"WE'RE NOT INTERESTED IN TRUTH, WE'RE INTERESTED IN WINNING. . . . . Say something we don't like and we will lie and accuse you with no bases but a nats worth of evidence. If you get in our way we will SWIFTBOAT you."

Just look at how Sarah Palin as the Republican Vice-President candidate attacked Obama. She was villianous.

Posted by: Here2day | July 23, 2010 12:07 AM | Report abuse

I managed to get halfway through the New Yorker article on Breitbart, then I couldn't read anymore. What a gross, despicable human being he is, a vexatious and bothersome pain in the a$$, a real creep - the definition of the word 'jerk.' Breitbart is the sort of person who would give interviews while sitting on the toilet, regaling the interviewer with the sounds and odors. I wouldn't p!ss on Breitbart if he were on fire, revolting swine that he is.

Posted by: RichardHode | July 23, 2010 12:33 AM | Report abuse

The media has never done its job of fact checking and editing in accepting his sniper journalism and he has banked on the media not doing its job. And rightly so.
==================

The problem is today's rush to get it on the air and get it on the Internet. When they let Breitbart drive the story, he can take all the time he wants in getting out his lies. He received this tape back in April and only thought about it when he decided to retaliate to the NAACP for asking the Tea Party to renounce racist elements in their midst.

The funny thing is, he had all this time and still didn't check any of it out. Because he doesn't have to; he has his ready-made built-in mouthpiece in Fox and his built-in audience in the lowest common denominator of the viewing public.

Posted by: MadamDeb | July 23, 2010 12:47 AM | Report abuse

I managed to get halfway through the New Yorker article on Breitbart, then I couldn't read anymore. What a gross, despicable human being he is, a vexatious and bothersome pain in the a$$, a real creep - the definition of the word 'jerk.' Breitbart is the sort of person who would give interviews while sitting on the toilet, regaling the interviewer with the sounds and odors. I wouldn't p!ss on Breitbart if he were on fire, revolting swine that he is.
Posted by: RichardHode
==========

I did the same thing, had the same reaction, and have the same opinion of this sewer rat that you have.

Posted by: MadamDeb | July 23, 2010 12:52 AM | Report abuse

As the grandchild of a Republican politician, someone who has campaigned for candidates of both major parties, 3rd parties, and no party, I'm getting tired of hearing this is all about "the Right" and "the left".

Those of us who have worked with children as parents (or aunts and uncles or other relatives), teachers, etc. and have tried to tell children there is a bright light between right and wrong should say that one exists here ---or quit telling kids there is a line between right and wrong.

"Breitbart -- who admitted flat out that he received the Sherrod video unedited and posted it without tracking down the orignal -- has dealt himself a severe blow here? "

Breitbart has gotten himself into trouble by his own actions.
From news stories, Charlie Rangel has gotten himself in trouble by his own actions.

Are those 2 men who should have known better?
Or does ideology say that someone on the "good guy" side can never make a mistake?

There is a Toles cartoon about a snake eating its tale which tells the whole story as far as I am concerned.

Posted by: GHDEL | July 23, 2010 2:59 AM | Report abuse

@ethan: Thanks very much for the clue about the Kurtz piece. It's very important:

"But for all the chatter -- some of it from Sherrod herself -- that she was done in by Fox News, the network didn't touch the story until her forced resignation was made public Monday evening, with the exception of brief comments by O'Reilly. After a news meeting Monday afternoon, an e-mail directive was sent to the news staff in which Fox Senior Vice President Michael Clemente said:"

"Let's take our time and get the facts straight on this story. Can we get confirmation and comments from Sherrod before going on-air. Let's make sure we do this right."


Posted by: sbj3
--------
I am going to disagree with you on this one because I saw one of the commentator admit mea culpa that they jumped the gun without all the facts in its place. You are just whitewashing FOX News' role in giving Breitbart credibility when he should have none. Like YES Men who fooled everyone while everybody was tripping over each other trying to get the latest scoop. This just reinforces that perception.

Posted by: beeker25 | July 23, 2010 8:45 AM | Report abuse

I'm getting tired of hearing this is all about "the Right" and "the left".
Posted by: GHDEL
----------
The media like to highlight the winners and losers and sadly it reinforces that to gullible people who believe in such divisions.

Posted by: beeker25 | July 23, 2010 8:50 AM | Report abuse

Greg - Go back & read what Taylorsucram wrote & pick it up from there.

News flash to all reporters, bloggers, columnists, editors & opinionators: WE'RE NOT PAYING AS MUCH ATTENTION TO YOU ALL AS YOU THINK!!

There's been more than enough ugliness. So stop it. How? Like all rumors or gossip, simply don't repeat it.

ALL WE WANT ARE FACTS! But check them twice before reporting or opining on the facts. Is that SO hard?????

Mom

Posted by: momshugs | July 23, 2010 9:39 AM | Report abuse


Greg... WAPO, the NY Times and a whole host of Left biased media have run with unverified stories for decades. If you need a refresher course to realize this use Google.com.

Breitbart didn't take precipitous action and fire Sherrod without asking for and giving her the opportunity to defend herself. That was done by the White House and or Secretary Vilsack.

Breitbart didn't have the original video as did the NAACP which lambasted Sherrod without taking the time to view the entire video.

The rush to blame the messenger once again belies WAPO's credibility.

And many blame FOX News - which in reality didn't do the story until after Sherrod had been fired!

Posted by: Hazmat77 | July 23, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse

What has been overlooked here is the malicious, actionable and unethical hatchet job done by Mr. Breitbart on Ms. Sherrod.

Mr. Breitbart deliberately portrayed Ms. Sherrod in a false light in order to attack her, the NAACP and President Obama.

Faux News uncritically picked up the whole unethical and false mess and ran with it ala "waterloo" which it is committed to as the official propaganda arm of the GOP. Why President Obama or any Democrat would give Faux News press credentials is beyond me.

The rest of the MSM has yapped on about what Obama did or didn't do. Who cares?

Mr. Breitbart deliberately and maliciously attacked an innocent person who, according to the very video which Breitbart chopped up, made a difference in transforming racial attitudes in the rural South and overcame her own anger and loss to be a successful and compassionate public servant.

Mr. Breitbart, Faux News and any others which harmed Ms. Sherrod need to be sued into bankruptcy!

Posted by: timothyhogan | July 23, 2010 11:13 AM | Report abuse

I have a better question.

Has anyone ever found out where this guy gets his money from?

Aren't you the folks credited with the term "follow the money."

Breitbart himself is nothing. The money is the story.

Posted by: dana16 | July 23, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Why can't the media just come out and say Breitbart is a liar? Is it really not that obvious?

Posted by: fishman2 | July 23, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

Obama is a failure. Iknow its tough for you guys to take but his inexperience is tripping him at every corner. Healthcare is a gov takeover and that means inferior care, Fin reg did not even address fannie and freddie whos great idea it was to make loans to deadbeats and racisism is alive and well and sherrod is proof. you guys suck at governing!

Posted by: JonGalt | July 23, 2010 4:28 PM | Report abuse

I hope the woman who was slandered by the right wing blogger sues him for all he is worth & I hope she names the FOX network as co-conspirators?

Posted by: nomad-one | July 23, 2010 7:53 PM | Report abuse

"Reporters and editors love to talk about other media figures." Absolutely, only not when the reporters and editors number, oh, about 400. The Washington Post is a great forum for digging into national security issues, so looking into a small group of 400 who think so highly of themselves and write for a living should be very easy too, especially given one of its own was in charge of it. So we're all waiting. Go ahead, open the floodgates, the silent majority really can't wait for the expose. Any day now.

Posted by: frankbayou | July 23, 2010 8:53 PM | Report abuse

Breitbart has lost all credibility and revealed himself as a partisan hack, not a journalist. A Rightwing propagandist, taking video snippets out of context and distorting them to score political points. It's what Republicans do.

Fear, Hatred, Distortion, Distraction and Division. It's all Republicans have to offer America.

No thanks. Been there, done that.

Posted by: thebobbob | July 24, 2010 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Could you and the rest of the media cover the whole FAKE ALVIN GREENE VIDEO (candidate for US Senate from South Carolina) situation in which he was purportedly rapping and was posted on TheWaPo site and other media outlets.

That tape was not vetted by The Washington Post (your paper), CNN (you know, where a Washington Post writer and Spitzer will soon be together), and others in the press that posted a video that painted a minority (not that race should matter, right?) in a non-flattering light. The context is the press couldn't stop blaming Fox and conservatives for the Sherrod tape and she was a USDA administrator, not someone running for the US Senate. So this had the effect of possibly changing a US Senate race days after the self-satisfied press had already begun bashing Fox and anyone else they don't approve of! That's the context. But because conservatives/independents aren't linked to it in any way whatsoever, you and the rest of the media (e.g., the all-to-self-righteous Anderson Cooper) will get a pass. Oh my, how predictable (and pathetic).

Posted by: jcannes76 | July 25, 2010 5:09 PM | Report abuse

Don't kid yourself. if Presideent Obama had failed to fire her, Fox would be screaming racism and lying about the whole incident.

It was a no win either way. Today the headlines would read

"Obama cover up. Racism rampant in White House"

Refuses to fire flagrant racist! If a white man had said this about a black man, he would have been out on his arse."


Do you doubt this? Watch Fox.

Posted by: bewildered1 | July 26, 2010 7:03 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company