Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

After Shirley Sherrod, time for the slow blogging movement

Perhaps you’ve heard about the slow food movement? I’d like to propose its cyber-cousin: the slow blogging movement.

Slow food is the response to fast food. It is about taking the time to savor rather than gulp, about celebrating the diversity of local ingredients and cuisines, about preserving traditional standards of excellence and ethical behavior.

You can see, in the wake of the warp-speed exposing and retracting, firing and unfiring of Shirley Sherrod, where I’m going with this.

Slow blogging may be the ultimate oxymoron. Blogging is about speed: the early post catches the Google. It is about linking, which may sound like creating a community and encouraging diversity of views but which too often deteriorates into a closed circle of reinforced preconceptions. It is about provocation. Shrillness sells. Even-handedness goes unclicked. Once the people in my business spent time checking and rechecking facts and first impressions. Opinion writers mulled things over. In the world of the blogosphere, mistakes can always be crossed through and corrected; seat-of-the-pants reactions refined.

Except: Shirley Sherrod.

I am being unfair, in part, by singling out the blgosphere. The Sherrod story originated there, but the sins of Andrew Breitbart were aided and abetted by bloggers’ co-conspirators on cable news. And, of course, in the Obama administration. Perhaps a better phrase would be slow news, which used to sound like a bad thing, back in the lazy days when those senior White House officials could wait until after the evening news to call you back and deliver their spin for the next day’s paper. But the Sherrod affair reminds us all that slow, or at least slower, news is often better news.

I read blogs. I write blog posts. I revel in the immediacy of the blogosphere. Sometimes less is more and quicker is better. You may not be able to do much to improve a well-marbled steak than to quickly sear it. Sometimes cooking something for too long turns it into mush. What chef loves a crockpot? But some dishes require care and patience. So does some journalism, whatever form it takes.

Slow blogging. Think about it.

By Ruth Marcus  | July 23, 2010; 9:25 AM ET
Categories:  Marcus  | Tags:  Ruth Marcus  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Charlie Rangel: ethics violator
Next: It's time to fix the estate tax

Comments

Here's an idea... let's start with the premise that if Breitbart/Beck/Limbaugh et al said it, then it's probably a lie. If Faux News aired it, then it's probably a lie. We can proceed to adjust or strategy and positions from that point.

Posted by: CardFan | July 23, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

Wow. Our need for greater thoughtfulness is manifest, but way to gut the argument by appealing to decadent foodie snobbery!

Why can't we all just be responsible without having to be self-indulgent?

Posted by: Itzajob | July 23, 2010 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Place the blame where it belongs: the political operatives at the White House.

No blogger, TV/radio host, reporter, or pundit possessed the ability to fire Shirley Sherrod. As far as I know, no one called for Sherrod's resignation before administration officials did.

The poor judgement & overreaction were with the administration political operatives. I have no idea whether President Obama knew about the decision, but some "high-ranking administration official" certainly triggered the pressure on Sherrod to resign.

If the White House had not reacted to the Breitbart video, it would have been just another 2 day internet story.

Posted by: pilsener | July 23, 2010 10:34 AM | Report abuse

Slow enough to get the link correct so it is clear this post is by Dionne and not Marcus. On my screen, it has a split identity.

Posted by: cinder1 | July 23, 2010 10:41 AM | Report abuse

Oh my! Ruth Marcus , you really woke up on the wrong side of the bed today!

Either that or your identity has been swiped by the Boston Strangler, Neon Dionne.

nother' great job on that slow cooking, newsy gathering by the Post Toasties.

Posted by: adamnescot1 | July 23, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

My gawd, people! It's almost a quarter to 1 and nobody's Tweeted what Tim Geithner had for lunch today yet! We have a right to know!

Posted by: Ralphinjersey | July 23, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse

The Sherrod Brown case exposes the moral bankruptcy of the conservative media. And while it is true that American journalism died years ago, what Americans don't need are the maggots like Drudge, Breitbart and the collective newsroom of FNC, et al, living and feeding on it's corpse. It's referred to as a public trust for a reason, but these and many other "journalists" have abandoned both trust and reason. A healthy democracy depends on a well informed electorate and these aforementioned "journalists" are by their actions, domestic terrorists, enemies of the state and should be dealt with accordingly. Disinformation in journalism is moral bankruptcy at best and treason at worst. Let's enforce the laws we have in place to combat it.

The bankruptcy is in the promotion of edited footage, without a care for the context of the speech, even less for the context of the thought contained in the edited sound bite. Letting people "see for themselves", a truncated sound bite serves only the promoters nefarious motives. There is obviously a pattern of method and motive from Breitbart between this latest escapade and his previous clever dismemberment of facts and reality in his set up scam of ACORN and his involvement in the attempted bugging of a US Senator's office. Breitbart is either a criminal, or he's pimping criminals. Either way, he reeks of moral bankruptcy.

Breitbart should consider teaming with stud/journalist, James 'Gannon' Guckert. That might lend him much needed credibility.

Posted by: mikeflagg | July 23, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse

Interesting idea, although it undermines the model. In a perfect world having actual journalists do the blogging and not ideological hacks is the real fix.

Breitbart- and the type on both the left and the right - are what is wrong with media today:

http://disenchantedjourno.blogspot.com/2010/07/thought-of-day-breitbart-is-actually.html

Posted by: DJOURNO | July 23, 2010 12:49 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps Ms. Marcus should set the example and remove her piece until it shows up in the print edition.

Posted by: kitchendragon50 | July 23, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

I read the line Ms Marcus wrote and agree that blogging needs to be slowed somewhat.

Here is the line she wrote:

"I am being unfair, in part, by singling out the blgosphere."

Although this is a little picky, I found a typo; however, I do agree that larger mistakes have been made. Some of them result in ruining people lives!!!

Posted by: ronhamp | July 23, 2010 1:46 PM | Report abuse

I think they call it progress Ms. Marcus. ... Cordially, "Joe T. Blacksmith".

Posted by: deepthroat21 | July 23, 2010 2:06 PM | Report abuse

CardFan wrote:

"Here's an idea... let's start with the premise that if Breitbart/Beck/Limbaugh et al said it, then it's probably a lie. If Faux News aired it, then it's probably a lie."

******

Uh, there's no "probably" about it. If they said it - indeed, if any right-winger says anything - it IS a lie. Undoubtedly.

Posted by: chert | July 23, 2010 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Pilsener wrote:

"Place the blame where it belongs: the political operatives at the White House.

No blogger, TV/radio host, reporter, or pundit possessed the ability to fire Shirley Sherrod. As far as I know, no one called for Sherrod's resignation before administration officials did."

******

That's not exactly true. That aged, mottled clown on Fox "News" called for her ouster, but that's neither here nor there. The fact is that while the administration did certainly jump the gun on the firing, once they learned of their error, they backtracked, apologized (profusely) and offered Ms. Sherrod another, more senior position. So, that's the job issue taken care of. What about the character assassination issue. Who was responsible for that? Who remains responsible for that by refusing to own up and apologize. What the administration does was wrong, but it's been rectified! Why are people so loath to put the blame - if not all of it 99% of it - where it so manifestly belongs? On Breitfart or Burpbart, or whatever his name is, and the cretins on Fox "News" that first aired it along with their recriminations? What about them? Are they blameless?

Posted by: chert | July 23, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

"slow blogs" ... you mean like books?

Posted by: smartygirl | July 23, 2010 2:36 PM | Report abuse

mikeflagg wrote:
"and his [Breitbart's] involvement in the attempted bugging of a US Senator's office"

***
As was later reported, there was no attempted bugging and apparently no bugging device even on O'Keefe's person. While I don't condone Breitbart, your own comment is clear evidence that the 'moral bankruptcy' and rush to judgment occurs on both sides of the political aisle (as Ms. Marcus correctly notes).

Posted by: gdbenson | July 23, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse

I would like to hear more about the right-wing double standard. People like Breitbart, Beck, Limbaugh (and on and on and on) can distort the news for their own purposes and get away with it. Somebody perceived to be "liberal" (like Dan Rather, for example) has to take the fall when he is caught. Why is that? Why is Rush Limbaugh still earning big bucks after twenty years of preposterous lies?

Posted by: gposner | July 23, 2010 3:16 PM | Report abuse

You can't control the flow of news or opinions, whether blogs or other media.

If you're a Government, however, you can control your reaction to the news and opinions.

The White House had a reflex reaction uninterrupted by any thought or due process.

"Pull over to the side of the road so you can resign right now."

That sounds like my daughter in the car when she was three years old. It's not the action of a responsible Government with adults in charge.

Certainly, this was not an example of Journalism at its best. It's more clear, however, that our Government is spinning out of touch with reality.

Who's in charge?

Who's answering the red phone when it rings at 3:00 AM?

These questons were asked, but not answered.

Posted by: jfv123 | July 23, 2010 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Blogging? How about reporting? The Post breathlessly reported, not blogged, false statements and speculation about this situation. Don't blame the blogs for shoddy reporting.

Posted by: dkp01 | July 23, 2010 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Blame for her getting fired goes to the White House, but blame for irresponsible journalism is what this column is about.

Posted by: Dadrick | July 23, 2010 3:44 PM | Report abuse

CardFan...when you don't know the facts, you'd be best to remain silent, rather than provide evidence of your ignorance.

Sherrod WAS fired by the White House BEFORE FoxNews ran the video or commented on the story.

I believe Bill O'Reilly mentioned the story but hadn't yet shown the video!

STOP protecting Obama for his ineptness, while blaming it on FOX .... I guess if you can't show a direct line to Bush43, FOX will do ....
d

Posted by: Hazmat77 | July 23, 2010 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Gosh now if only we had the capacity to delete our own comments, we might be able spare ourselves and others our own occasional stupidity.

Posted by: Nymous | July 23, 2010 3:53 PM | Report abuse

They trash Glen Beck but they love Keith Obermann,Jack Cafferty and Chris Matthews...Put all four in a paper bag...shake it up and tell me which one will come out first...

Posted by: corebanks1940 | July 23, 2010 4:17 PM | Report abuse

chert - Check your facts. Howard Kurtz has the timeline. By the time the story first aired on Fox (O'Reilly show), Sherrod had already been forced to resign.

Since when did Andrew Breitbart become so powerful, that the White House and agriculture department need to panic with no fact checking. According to multiple posters, neither Fox News or Breitbart have any credibility, so why would the White House care what they post or report?

Posted by: pilsener | July 23, 2010 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Couldn't agree more, Ruth. I wrote the same thing yesterday in my blog, capturingthenews.com. I urged the new media to learn from the old media: take it slow, be skeptical, double-check, be fair and civil.
http://bit.ly/aVjopb

Posted by: tonycollings | July 23, 2010 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Fox posted the edited video on its website, including that idiot's article and kept using it as "breaking news" on TV.
They saw a juicy anti-black story and ran with it without checking its accuracy (no wonder, lying is the crux of conservative propaganda)

You can check the timeline of all the event related to this issue at Media Matters.

mediamatters.org/research/201007220004

Posted by: sgtpepper23 | July 23, 2010 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Fox posted the edited video on its website, including that idiot's article and kept using it as "breaking news" on TV.
They saw a juicy anti-black story and ran with it without checking its accuracy (no wonder, lying is the crux of conservative propaganda)

You can check the timeline of all the event related to this issue at Media Matters.
http://mediamatters.org/research/201007220004

Posted by: sgtpepper23 | July 23, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

THE MAMA TEST

I was out walking with my 4-year-old daughter.
She picked up something off of the ground and Started to put it in her
mouth.
I took the item away from her and I asked her not to do that.
'Why?' my daughter asked.
'Because it's been on the ground;
You don't know where it's been, it's dirty, And probably has germs,' I
replied.
At this point, my daughter looked at me
With total admiration and asked,
'Mama, how do you know all this stuff?
You are so smart.'
I was thinking quickly and replied,
'All moms know this stuff.... It's on the Mama Test.
You have to know it, or they don't let you be a Mama.'
We walked along in silence for 2 or 3 minutes, But she was evidently
pondering this new information.
'Oh.....I get it!' she beamed,
'So if you don't pass the test you have to be the dad.'
'Exactly,' I replied with a big smile on my face.



Posted by: rmorris391 | July 23, 2010 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Fox posted the edited video on its website 30 minutes after that racist idiot put it out, including his article and kept flashing it as "breaking news" on TV.
They saw a juicy anti-black story and ran with it without checking its accuracy (no wonder, lying is the crux of conservative propaganda)

You can check out the timeline of all the events related to this issue at Media Matters:
http://mediamatters.org/research/201007220004

Posted by: sgtpepper23 | July 23, 2010 4:49 PM | Report abuse

Fox posted the edited video on its website 30 minutes after that racist idiot put it out, including his article and kept flashing it as "breaking news" on TV.
They saw a juicy anti-black story and ran with it without checking its accuracy (no wonder, lying is the crux of conservative propaganda)

You can check out the timeline of all the events related to this issue at Media Matters:
http://mediamatters.org/research/201007220004
------------------------------------------------
kinda reminds me when someone said...the cops were stupid

Posted by: corebanks1940 | July 23, 2010 4:56 PM | Report abuse

I say give Breitbart the Lindsay Lohan treatment . . .

Chase after him with cameras rolling and hollering questions at him like "WHY DO YOU KEEP LYING??????"

. . . but that's just me.

Posted by: palmtree2001 | July 23, 2010 5:16 PM | Report abuse

Mr. President, the buck stops with you. Will you, or will you not, instruct your supporters in a definitive, categorical, unambiguous statement, once and for all, that they must cease and desist in using the race card to demonize anyone who dares criticize your policies and ideology?

Posted by: thebump | July 23, 2010 5:43 PM | Report abuse

cardfan, lets start from this point, you're full of crapola. lets see an apology to the teaparty for the lies told by the black congressmen about the incident in d.c. hahaha. bye bye dems and rino's in 2010-2012.

Posted by: 12thgenamerican | July 23, 2010 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Hazmat77 wrote:

"Sherrod WAS fired by the White House BEFORE FoxNews ran the video or commented on the story."

*****

Because your retarded, lying hero, Breitfart or Burpbart, whatever his name is, the pseudo-journalist anyway posted A DOCTORED RENDERING OF THE VIDEO ON HIS SITE!!! AND THEN MADE IT AVAILABLE TO FOX "NEWS". Any comment on that, you hypocrite?!

Posted by: chert | July 23, 2010 6:26 PM | Report abuse

Pilsener, the right-wing hero and pseudo-journalist, Breitfart, posted his doctored video on his post. Bill O'Reilly reported on it, and by the time Hannity came on, he was able to report that the deed was done. But, guess what? Now, it's undone. Has Burpbart undone his lying smear? No! Because lies and smears are about all the right-wing is capable of. As for your question:

"According to multiple posters, neither Fox News or Breitbart have any credibility, so why would the White House care what they post or report?"

Answer: God only knows, because the multiple posters are 100% correct. Fox "News" is basically a latrine masquerading as a news organization.

Posted by: chert | July 23, 2010 6:33 PM | Report abuse

In case you have ANY doubt remaining about Andrew Breitbart's relentless dishonesty, check out this piece at Slate. They examine the talk she gave in detail, along with Breitbart's sad attempts to misreport it as indicative of NAACP racism. I highly recommend a read of it.

http://www.slate.com/id/2261552/pagenum/all/#p2

Posted by: B2O2 | July 23, 2010 6:35 PM | Report abuse

I think the denizens of the corporate mainstream media are too busy cowering in fear of the right-wing gong machine to recognize the obvious. This is not a complicated issue. Andrew Breitbart selectively showed only a small portion of Shirley Sherrod's comments, completely out of context, to make it appear as if she were saying the exact opposite of what she actually said. In the common parlance, this is called lying. I think Sherrod could probably successfully sue Breitbart for defamation, even though she's a public figure. Breitbart's actual malice seems obvious. This is not an issue in which "we are all guilty" of something. Once again, Breitbart has revealed himself to be an unscrupulous liar. Period. End of story.

Posted by: ejs2 | July 23, 2010 6:46 PM | Report abuse

What we need now...more black folks who have their own Media ( like Breitbart) who can get whitey talkin' about his/her prejudice but without any "growth." wow...would hidden microphones do it...ie... even a Reality Show...catchin' white folks!

Posted by: judithclaire1939 | July 23, 2010 7:23 PM | Report abuse

What we need now...more black folks who have their own Media ( like Breitbart) who can get whitey talkin' about his/her prejudice but without any "growth." wow...would hidden microphones do it...ie... even a Reality Show...catchin' white folks!

Posted by: judithclaire1939 | July 23, 2010 7:25 PM | Report abuse

Marcus joins CNN, MSNBC, and half the Post reporters in going after...

The White House that fired Sherrod ?

The NAACP that ordered the White House to fire Sherrod ?

The "one-time now-reformed racist" Sherrod who called Breitbart a 'racist" ?

Nope.. ALL the blame is placed on a blogger who posted a video snippet.

Who knew a blogger would expose the race-card fiasco that dominates our media, our politics, the White House and of course the NAACP - home of top racists: Al Sharpton and Jeremiah White.

Posted by: Petras123 | July 23, 2010 7:57 PM | Report abuse

I must join others who point out, quite correctly, that it was the the White House that had a hair trigger reaction. One doctored video and wham, off they go, violating what any reasonably intelligent organizational leader knows is basic: get the facts, make sure you have all the facts, analyze with care. Obama et al. are so frightened of their own shadows that all the right wing has to do is clear its collective throat to get apologetic let-us-kiss-your-behind responses.

Posted by: lstrauss2 | July 23, 2010 8:06 PM | Report abuse

"This is a circus. It's a national disgrace. And from my standpoint, as a black American, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you."

Having grown up in Georgia, Clarence Thomas may well agree that what Andrew Breitbart and his cohorts at FoxNews attempted this week was a "high-tech lynching" of Shirley Sherrod.

Posted by: HughBriss | July 23, 2010 8:15 PM | Report abuse

No, your not going to get away with what your attempting to do. Public opinion belong to us regardless of the bogus teachable moment by Sherrod. Sherrod is a racist. Too bad her teachable moment only was meant for the first part of her speech. The second part of Sherrod speech clearly shows Sherrod for the racist she is. No one offered a window into how Sherrod did her job, but herself. She boasted about it and when she saw she stuck her foot in her mouth, she turned it into a teachable moment. No one told Sherrod to play the racist for the NAACP. Not even Breitbart. Sherrod gets no passes here.

Posted by: houstonian | July 23, 2010 10:08 PM | Report abuse

No, your not going to get away with what your attempting to do. Public opinion belong to us regardless of the bogus teachable moment by Sherrod. Sherrod is a racist. Too bad her teachable moment only was meant for the first part of her speech. The second part of Sherrod speech clearly shows Sherrod for the racist she is. No one offered a window into how Sherrod did her job, but herself. She boasted about it and when she saw she stuck her foot in her mouth, she turned it into a teachable moment. No one told Sherrod to play the racist for the NAACP. Not even Breitbart. Sherrod gets no passes here.

Posted by: houstonian | July 23, 2010 10:10 PM | Report abuse

No, your not going to get away with what your attempting to do. Public opinion belong to us regardless of the bogus teachable moment by Sherrod. Sherrod is a racist. Too bad her teachable moment only was meant for the first part of her speech. The second part of Sherrod speech clearly shows Sherrod for the racist she is. No one offered a window into how Sherrod did her job, but herself. She boasted about it and when she saw she stuck her foot in her mouth, she turned it into a teachable moment. No one told Sherrod to play the racist for the NAACP. Not even Breitbart. Sherrod gets no passes here.

Posted by: houstonian | July 23, 2010 10:11 PM | Report abuse

Petras123 wrote:

"Nope.. ALL the blame is placed on a blogger who posted a video snippet."

Yeah, imagine that. Blaming the person whose deliberate lie started the whole thing. What will analysts think of next? Laying responsibility for actions on the people who committed the acts. What a novel concept!

Posted by: B2O2 | July 23, 2010 10:18 PM | Report abuse

Given the left-wing media echo on Breitbart.. by CNN and Post reporters... I have one question to ask Marcus...

Were you a member of the left-wing listserv cabal called Journ-O-list ?

And heck just what does the "O" stand for ?

Posted by: Petras123 | July 23, 2010 10:55 PM | Report abuse

CNN is trying to turn Sherrod into a hero but she is calling Breibart and anyone who challenges the President a "racist".

Shirley Sherrod, who didn’t know who Andrew Breitbart was 72 hours ago, now knows him well enough to say that he wants to put "all blacks back into slavery".

If I were David Axelrod, I’d be calling this woman and beg her to stop talking. And, yes, she does owe Breitbart an apology.

Can a person go under the Obama bus twice?

Posted by: Petras123 | July 23, 2010 11:04 PM | Report abuse

Reader Bill Ernoehazy writes: “ At this point I think it’s worth asking: Did someone on Vilsack’s staff push for a panicky ejection because Sherrod had a _reputation_ for race-baiting?

In less than three days she’s castigated the President, and now Breitbart, on nakedly racial grounds. What did Vilsack’s staff know, and when will WE know it?”

ANOTHER UPDATE: More thoughts from Dave Price. “And remember — the Obama admin now owns Shirley Sherrod. There’s no way for them to look good on this anymore. If they fired her, then apologized and offered her a promotion on a flimsy ‘context’ argument, then found out she was someone whose wildly inflammatory accusations make Reverend Jeremiah Wright look like the soul of racial unity and reasonable dialogue… the already oil-drenched competence myth is now taking a slash to the jugular.”

Posted by: Petras123 | July 23, 2010 11:10 PM | Report abuse

I saw Orielly say Sherrod needs to resign. That means when he said it she had not yet resigned. The people trying to clear Fox of wrongdoing are playing games again. Remember the picture of the healthcare protest? Also a fake. Remember when they ran the picture of congressman Foleys sex scandal? They called him a democrat. The list is endless.

Posted by: jimbobkalina | July 26, 2010 2:47 AM | Report abuse

Well, fox ran the story AFTER sherrod's resignation.

if you have a problem with that, get over yourself.

Posted by: docwhocuts | July 26, 2010 7:57 AM | Report abuse

The other half is the duty of national media to reconnect with local journalists. Instead of sending in the star reporters afterwards, get out that overflowing rolodex and call the folks who really know. Every state house has a beat reporter, and here in Burlington, even our Gannett paper has good local political reporters. Our public television and radio both do this weekly (tv) and daily (radio), so NPR and the News Hour can easily lead the way.

I know it's a tough time to be a star reporter, trying to sell the shareholders on sending you out on big stories, which, in turn, get amplified by your byline. But maybe that's not the right way to go about it.

Tip O'Neill famously said, "All politics is local." That means, healthy political decisions need solid local fact-finding. As if to underscore the point, Shirley Sherrod herself has said what she most wants is for some of those who misjudged her to come pay a real visit to the region, the land, the people she so obviously knows well and loves.

Posted by: revelz | July 26, 2010 8:44 AM | Report abuse

Sadly, what happened to Ms. Sherrod is nothing new--only a trend that has existed for years (if not decades), followed to its most absurd conclusion.

The real lessons in all of this are that a world made up of sound bites is not a good place in which to live, and that--above all--CONTEXT MATTERS.

Even Newt Gingrich acknowledges this.

Posted by: Rhino40 | July 26, 2010 8:47 AM | Report abuse

Speaking of fast blogging, there was a report online Friday from the Boston Globe that claimed that "several dozens" of upper level Pentagon top security cleared employees were caught downloading massive amounts of child porn on their government computers. All weekend long, nothing more on this, and if true, it certainly does seem like there'd be a follow-up. Is this just another of our "don't worry about getting it right, just get it fast" news bulletins?

Posted by: curtb | July 26, 2010 9:18 AM | Report abuse

Funny how media complicity in one scandal is hyped (i.e., Shirley Sherrod) because it's from their competitors on the right, while another, more important one, is ignored (the JournoList scandal) is ignored because it involves one of their own. Selective coverage is corrupt coverage, and only diminshes the credibility of anything you have to say, Ms. Marcus.

Posted by: braunt | July 26, 2010 9:22 AM | Report abuse

In the race to be the first voice to outrage over President Obama's recess appoint of Donald Berwick, Ruth Marcus fails to mention that her husband got elevated to a job at the FTC by President Bush's recess appointment.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2010/07/obamas_cynical_recess_appointm.html

Next time you think about throwing stones, don't forget how fragile your glass house is.

Posted by: mbrown43 | July 26, 2010 10:58 AM | Report abuse

@mbrown43
Actually, Ms. Marcus did a fair job of explaining herself concerning any perceived hypocrisy in the case of her hubsband's recess appointment. However, you do bring up a good point concerning the limitations such potential conflicts place on journalists and opinionators when they are so deeply intertwined with the politcal establishment they purport to objectively sructinize.

Posted by: braunt | July 26, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

that should be "scrutinize" at the end

Posted by: braunt | July 26, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

It is amazing in this situation how "cable news" and "talk radio" get smeared by a reputable WP writer. The Obama administration had fired Sherrod before the video had even been discussed or been aired on "cable news" or "talk radio". ALL the blame for this fiasco lies at the feet of the NAACP and the Administration. Agreed that Breitbart was to blame for not airing the full video, but I assume the NAACP had full access to the complete video since it was at their conference; but they still ran from Sherrod like a scared sissy from a bully. Put the blame where it belongs!

Posted by: apaulbrown | July 26, 2010 1:49 PM | Report abuse

Given that the Post's op-ed writers tend to be shallow, across the board and in some cases incoherent (Cohen), recyclers (Broder), bigots (Krauthamer), Marcus stands out for studpidity, although she normally has competition from Gerson. WaPo's initial coverage was as bad as anyone's and this was after the blogging community actually had started looking at the actual video. The idea that someone should pay attention to a "story" because Drudge, Breitbart, or Limabiagh are pushing it was the first mistake that WaPo and others made. Newsgathering orgs are supposed to do more than rewrite someone els's soundbite. They might actually look at the whole video (which they didn't do here). EJ Dionne, who had been slipping into the worst sort of Beltway laziness (he couldn't bring himself to hate McCain for being a craven, flipflopper), seems to have woken up to the mainstream media's culpability in this. Perhaps, if Marcus ever reads her own paper, she might notice.

Posted by: thebuckguy | July 26, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

One thing you can count on Ruth, baby, the screaming and propoganda is just going to increase. We learned from you pinkos how to treat a President and VP candidate. I hope more STalin/Lenin/Obama billboard never should have come down, more should have been put up. Time to put people like you out of a job. We hate liberals like you.
Americans hate liberals. We hate your lying revisionist history, your insane anti-Semitic bigotry, your blatant, pandering entitlement slavery racism. We hate your neo-commie ideology, your wannabe but ain't elitist attitude and your lying pseudo intellectual bu!! Our current President does not even believe in the greatness of our Constitution.

The anger from the right toward this Administration and it's policies and programs is specific, easily articulated, thorough and clear. The Left has nothing but vile gaffes as a defense.


Bi#$es like you Ruth have nothing to say except "get Palin"

Posted by: carla2 | July 27, 2010 10:46 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company