About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Timeline of Breitbart's Sherrod smear

July 22, 2010 7:38 am ET — 95 Comments

Media Matters has documented a timeline of Andrew Breitbart's smear of Shirley Sherrod, from Breitbart's initial posting of his deceptively edited clip of Sherrod -- which was amplified by Fox News and other right-wing media -- through the release of the full video of Sherrod's comments, which made clear the context of her remarks.

Monday

11:18 a.m.*: Breitbart posts Sherrod video, calls her "racist," claims "Context is everything." Breitbart posted the heavily edited video of Sherrod and falsely suggested that Sherrod discriminated against a white farmer in her capacity as the Agriculture Department's Georgia Director of Rural Development:

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.

Fox News amplifies Breitbart's deceptively edited video. On July 19, FoxNews.com reported: "Days after the NAACP clashed with Tea Party members over allegations of racism, a video has surfaced showing an Agriculture Department official regaling an NAACP audience with a story about how she withheld help to a white farmer facing bankruptcy." The FoxNews.com article further reported that "[t]he video clip was first posted by BigGovernment.com" and that "FoxNews.com is seeking a response from both the NAACP and the USDA." The article is no longer available on FoxNews.com but was republished on another website:

originalfoxsherrodstory

12:13 p.m.: Hoft runs with Breitbart video. In a Gateway Pundit post titled, "More Racism at NAACP: Radical Obama Official Admits That She Openly Discriminates Against Whites," Jim Hoft posted Breitbart's video clip and wrote: "The former civil rights group known as the NAACP does not just invite anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan and radical America-hating Marxist Jeremiah Wright to speak at their events ...They also invite government officials who hate whitey, too." Hoft further wrote that "Sherrod admits in a speech at the NAACP that she discriminated against farmers because they were white."

12:55 p.m.: HotAir's Morrissey: "Breitbart hits NAACP with promised video of racism." HotAir's Ed Morrissey wrote in a post titled, "Breitbart hits NAACP with promised video of racism," that the video "show[s] USDA official Shirley Sherrod explain to an appreciative NAACP audience in July 2009 how she deliberately withheld information from a white farmer in Georgia trying to save his land and his business." Morrissey later noted: "Actually, if Sherrod had a different ending for this story, it could have been a good tale of redemption. She almost grasps this by initially noting that poverty is the real issue, which should be the moral of the anecdote. Instead of having acted on this realization -- and perhaps mindful of the audience -- Sherrod then backtracks and says that it's really an issue of race after all."

1:40 p.m. (approximately): Fox Nation accuses Sherrod of "discrimination caught on tape" before she resigned. Fox Nation linked to Breitbart's Big Government piece and posted the deceptively cropped clips of Sherrod's speech at the NAACP in a post titled, "Caught on Tape: Obama Official Discriminates Against White Farmer":

foxnation-20100719-headline1

The first reader to comment on the post is from July 19 at 1:41 p.m.:

foxnation-20100719-comment1

After news broke that Sherrod resigned, the post's headline was changed to read "Obama Official Resigns After Discrimination Caught on Tape":

foxnation-20100720-headline2

1:49 p.m.: Ace of Spades picks up Sherrod story, calls it an example of "your government, working for you." In an Ace of Spades post, blogger "Ace" posted Breitbart's video and wrote that "[f]aced with a white farmer whose farm was in Chapter 12," Sherrod "decided she wouldn't do 'the full force' of what she could do to help him, because she was concerned about black folks losing their farms."

3:31 p.m.: Elizabeth Scalia of the blog The Anchoress raises questions about the editing of Breitbart's video. In her post, Scalia wrote, "I am uncomfortable with this 'get' by Breitbart." Scalia further questioned Breitbart's selectively edited video of Sherrod's comments (emphasis in the original):

Nevertheless I am uncomfortable with this "get" by Breitbart.

[...]

But the video ends so abruptly!

Sherrod, who is not an impressive public speaker, says she did not do all she could for the "poor white farmer" who she perceived to be somehow both asking for her help and simultaneously "trying to show me he was superior to me; I knew what he was doing ..." She admits that she did just "enough" for the farmer so as to cover her own sense of accountability and then: "I took him to a white lawyer ... I figured if I took him to one of them, then his own kind would take care of him."

Yes, there is a bit of paranoid projection, there, and some shocking language -- language that has been rightly rejected by society -- that seems to play well to the audience. But then Sherrod apparently has a revelation. She begins to understand that "it's about poor versus those who have, and not so much about white -- it is about white and black -- but you know it opened my eyes, because I took him to one of his own."

Yes? AND?

[...]

Doesn't it seem like, after all of that sort of winking, "you and I know how they really are" racist crap wherein Sherrod -- intentionally or not -- indicts her own narrow focus, she was heading to a more edifying message? What did it open her eyes about? Was she about to say "I took him to one of his own, but it shouldn't have mattered about that; my job was to serve all the farmers who needed help."

Was she about to say, "I learned about myself and about how far we still have to go?"

Was she about to say "it's not poor vs those who have, because we are not at war, we are just in the same human reality that ever was?"

Was she about to say, "poor is poor, hungry is hungry and the past is the past when a family can't eat?"

I want to know. Because it seemed like Sherrod was heading somewhere with that story, and the edit does not let us get there. I want the rest of the story before I start passing judgment on it.

[...]

I want to see the rest of the tape. I cannot believe Sherrod ended on "I took him to one of his own." Either she said something much worse after that (which we would have seen) or she said something much better.

If it was something "better" then we should have seen that, too.

4:01 p.m. Ace of Spades reports that CBS' NYC affiliate picked up Sherrod story, declares, "Breitbart gets results." "Ace" wrote that a "CBS Affiliate Picks Up Breitbart's Vid of Sherrod's Racist Attitude" and that "Breitbart gets results."

4:28 p.m. (approximately): Sherrod story hits Drudge. The Drudge Report linked to CBS' New York City affiliate's story on Sherrod with the headline, SHOCK: Video Suggests Racism At NAACP Event." From the Drudge Report:

drudge_sherrod

4:50 p.m.: Breitbart tweets to Media Matters: "Tomorrow's gonna be a long day." In a Twitter post to Media Matters for America, Breitbart wrote: "Get some rest. Tomorrow's gonna be long day & first of many in a row."

breitbart450tweet

7:51 p.m.*: Big Government links to a FoxNews.com article reporting that Sherrod had resigned and USDA repudiated her remarks. Big Government stated: "This morning, we broke video of a USDA official, Shirley Sherrod, recounting for attendees at an NAACP awards dinner how she withheld help from a white farmer seeking the agency's help in saving his farm. Fox News is reporting that Ms. Sherrod has resigned." The FoxNews.com article reported that "[t]he Agriculture Department announced Monday, shortly after FoxNews.com published its initial report on the video, that Sherrod had resigned."

8:21 p.m.: Allahpundit questions the video's editing, but says he will "assume Breitbart's edit is fair to the spirit of her remarks." In a HotAir post, blogger Allahpundit echoed Scalia's concerns about the video's editing of Sherrod's statement, despite his "assum[ption]" that "Breitbart's edit is fair to the spirit of her remarks":

Here's Ed's post on the vid in case you missed it this morning. It's a great write-up, but The Anchoress adds an important wrinkle: Doesn't it sound like Sherrod was building to a "but" before the clip cut out?

8:50 p.m.: O'Reilly airs Breitbart's Sherrod video. On his Fox News program, Bill O'Reilly stated that "Sherrod was caught on tape saying something very disturbing. Seems a white farmer in Georgia had requested government assistance from Ms. Sherrod." After airing Breitbart's video, O'Reilly stated: "That is simply unacceptable. And Ms. Sherrod must resign immediately." (accessed via Nexis)

9:04 p.m.: "Fox News Alert": Hannity reports that Sherrod has resigned and discusses the incident with Gingrich. On his Fox News program, Sean Hannity reported that Sherrod "resigned just a short time ago after she was caught on tape appearing to tell an audience that she had used her position to racially discriminate against white farmers." Hannity then aired Breitbart's "shocking video." In a later segment, Fox News contributor Newt Gingrich stated: "Secretary Vilsack did exactly the right thing. I mean I often disagree with this administration. But firing her after that kind of viciously racist attitude was exactly the right thing to do." Hannity later stated: "My only thing is they weren't the ones that caught it. It was on Breitbart.com and it happened some time ago. So it's interesting that it took the new media to expose this." (accessed via Nexis)

9:10 p.m.: NAACP's Jealous tweets that "NAACP is appalled" by Sherrod's comments. In a Twitter post that has since been deleted, NAACP president Ben Jealous wrote: "Racism is about abuse of power. Sherrod had it at USDA. She abused a white farmer because of his race. NAACP is appalled. Go to naacp.org." The NAACP's initial statement regarding Sherrod's comments has been removed from its website, but as Talking Points Memo reported, Jealous said in the statement: "Racism is about the abuse of power. Sherrod had it in her position at USDA. According to her remarks, she mistreated a white farmer in need of assistance because of his race. We are appalled by her actions, just as we are with abuses of power against farmers of color and female farmers."

9:33 p.m.: On CNN, Tea Party organizer Loesch references Sherrod story. During a segment on CNN's Larry King Live about racism in the tea party, Dana Loesch, a conservative radio host and an organizer with the Nationwide Tea Party Coalition, mentioned "Shirley Sherrod speaking at an NCAAP banquet, going off about a member of the government, by the way, state director of the USDA of rural development for Georgia -- saying that she actually was basing whether or not she was going to help somebody on the color of their skin." 

9:44 p.m.: Hannity's Great American Panel discusses Sherrod video. During the "Great American Panel" segment of Fox News' Hannity, Republican strategist Kate Obenshain stated, "It's just a shame that it takes an expose, it takes Breitbart having to put it on his website, for her resignation to be forced." The Wall Street Journal's John Fund stated: "Obviously no one complained at the Georgia NAACP. No one complained. It would have passed unless they had this video which came out now." Hannity further stated that Sherrod's comments were "racist." (accessed via Nexis)

9:49 p.m.: Doug Powers: "USDA Official Resigns After 'White Farmer' Video." In a post on Michelle Malkin's website, Doug Powers wrote, "We interrupt this 'Tea Partiers are so incredibly racially biased' broadcast for the following update" and linked to FoxNews.com's article on Sherrod's resignation. Powers further linked to Breitbart's video, writing, "The video posted at BigGovernment that started it all is here if you haven't seen/heard it yet."

10:20 p.m.: Perino discusses Sherrod on Fox's On the Record. On Fox News' On the Record, guest host Dana Perino reported on Sherrod's resignation and aire Breitbart's video. Perino stated that "the video adds fuel to a growing controversy after the NAACP approved a resolution condemning the tea party movement for not denouncing racist members." (accessed via Nexis)

10:39 p.m.: On CNN, Johns reports on Sherrod's resignation. In the network's first report on the matter, Joe Johns said that Sherrod "has resigned after a YouTube video surfaced showing her describing to an NAACP audience how she withheld help to a white farmer," then aired a portion of her comments from the Breitbart clip.

Tuesday

12:03 a.m.: Sweetness & Light picks up the Sherrod story. The conservative blog Sweetness & Light picked up the Sherrod story in a post titled, "USDA Official Out Over Racist Comments." The post also linked to Breitbart's video.

1:12 a.m.: NewsBusters criticizes broadcast networks for ignoring "racist comments" at NAACP meeting. NewsBusters' Noel Sheppard wrote that "the three broadcast evening news programs completely ignored the story," which he said started "[a]t 8:18 AM Monday" when Big Government first posted the Sherrod video.

4:09 a.m.*: Big Government republishes NAACP statement denouncing Sherrod. A Big Government post republished a statement by the NAACP's Jealous in which Jealous said, "We concur with US Agriculture Secretary Vilsack in accepting the resignation of Shirley Sherrod for her remarks at a local NAACP Freedom Fund banquet." Jealous further stated that "[w]e are appalled by [Sherrod's] actions."

6:08 a.m. Sherrod story hits Fox & Friends: "Exhibit A" in "what racism looks like." On Fox News' Fox & Friends, Steve Doocy said Sherrod had been caught "making a speech to the NAACP that sure sounded racist." Co-host Alisyn Camerota then accused Sherrod of "touting this in this anecdote as though this is, you know, a feather in her cap, somehow, for her to be congratulated." Then Camerota and Doocy agreed that the comments were "Exhibit A" as far as "what racism looks like." On-screen text during the segment read, "Racism caught on camera" and "USDA official admits racism on tape; Forced to resign after dicey video leaks."

6:43 a.m.: Morning Joe airs Sherrod clip. MSNBC's Morning Joe aired the edited Sherrod clip and reported that Vilsack accepted Sherrod's resignation. Co-host Joe Scarborough then said that "a narrative is going to emerge ... certainly on the right with this tape that's just come out -- and you'll be hearing this the next couple of days. I think its relevance relates back to the New Black Panthers tapes that have been out there."

6:53 a.m.: In CNN interview, Sherrod claims that she told the administration that her comments were taken out of context, but that they're afraid of "Fox and the Tea Party." In an interview on CNN's American Morning, Sherrod stated that the story she was recounting in the edited video clip took place in 1986 and that she was not working for the Department of Agriculture at the time. Co-host John Roberts later stated: "Miss Sherrod, let's make it clear though, that this happened 24 years ago. You eventually worked with this white farmer. You eventually became friends, you say, with the farmer and his wife." Sherrod replied, "Yes." Roberts then asked, "So, the question I have is, when the U.S. Department of Agriculture came to you and said you have to step down, why didn't you just say, wait a minute, you don't know the full story. Here's the full story, why should I step down?" Sherrod replied, "I did say that, but they, for some reason, the stuff that Fox and the Tea Party does is scaring the administration. I told them get the whole tape and look at the whole tape and look at how I tell people we have to get beyond race and start working together."

Sherrod to AJC: Encounter happened 24 years ago and was "completely misconstrued" by Breitbart because she was discussing "getting beyond the issue of race." The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported on July 20 morning that Sherrod said her comments were "misconstrued" and that the event she was discussing took place 24 years ago. In a phone interview with the Journal-Constitution, Sherrod said the video was "completely misconstrued" and "excluded the breadth of the story about how she eventually worked with the man over a two-year period to help ward off foreclosure of his farm, and how she eventually became friends with him and his wife." From the AJC:

But in a phone interview from her home in Albany early Tuesday morning, Shirley Sherrod told the Atlanta-Journal Constitution that the video posted online Monday by biggovernment.com and reported on by FoxNews.com and the AJC completely misconstrued the message she was trying to convey.

[...]

But Tuesday morning, Sherrod said what online viewers weren't told in reports posted throughout the day Monday was that the tale she told at the banquet happened 24 years ago -- before she got the USDA job -- when she worked with the Georgia field office for the Federation of Southern Cooperative/Land Assistance Fund.

[...]

Sherrod said the short video clip excluded the breadth of the story about how she eventually worked with the man over a two-year period to help ward off foreclosure of his farm, and how she eventually became friends with him and his wife.

"And I went on to work with many more white farmers," she said. "The story helped me realize that race is not the issue, it's about the people who have and the people who don't. When I speak to groups, I try to speak about getting beyond the issue of race."

8:05 a.m.: Ingraham: "Andrew Breitbart ... did a great piece on this whole thing." On Fox & Friends, Laura Ingraham praised Breitbart's video and his coverage of the story, stating "Andrew Breitbart, by the way, did a great piece on this whole thing. Fantastic." Ingraham went on to ask "where was the media on this" and claimed that it took "Breitbart to come forward with this story."

9:22 a.m.: Fox News reports on Sherrod's AJC comments. On America's Newsroom, after airing the edited video of Sherrod's comments, co-host Martha MacCallum stated: "Sherrod says that that story is about something that happened 24 years ago ... and that she uses the story when speaking to groups to point out how racism can and needs to be overcome." MacCallum then cited Sherrod's quote in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution article. MacCallum's guest, Byron York of The Washington Examiner, said: "I think in fairness to her, we need to see the whole story. We need to see the whole tape, and how she delivered the story."

9:52 a.m.: Beck asks, "Have we transformed into 1956?" On his radio show, Glenn Beck discussed the Sherrod story and asked, "Excuse me, have we transformed into 1956, only the other way around?" Beck also aired Breitbart's edited Sherrod clip.

11:06 a.m.: On CNN Newsroom, Sherrod claims she was told to resign because she would "be on Glenn Beck tonight." In an interview on CNN Newsroom, Sherrod recounted that Cheryl Cook, the deputy undersecretary of the Department of Agriculture, asked her to resign. Sherrod said that Cook told her, "Well, Shirley, they want you to pull over to the side of the road and do it because you're going to be on Glenn Beck tonight."

SHERROD: Oh, I can tell you, that was Cheryl Cook, the deputy undersecretary. She called me and said -- because she called me, and I said, "Cheryl, I've got a three and a half hour ride to get into Athens." She called me a second time, "Where are you now?" I said, "I'm just going through Atlanta."

She called me again and I said, "I'm at least 45 minutes to an hour from Athens." She said, "Well, Shirley, they want you to pull over to the side of the road and do it because you're going to be on Glenn Beck tonight."

TONY HARRIS (host): Wow. So the administration pressured you out?

SHERROD: Yes.

HARRIS: How do you feel about that?

SHERROD: I don't feel good about it, because I know I didn't do anything wrong. And I know during my time at USDA, I gave it all I had.

I worked when I didn't feel like it. I pushed the staff to get out there in places they had not been into before.

11:20 a.m.: On CNN Newsroom, farmer's wife calls Sherrod a "friend" who "helped us save our farm." On CNN Newsroom, during his interview with Sherrod, host Tony Harris also interviewed Eloise Spooner -- the wife of the farmer who Sherrod helped -- who came to the defense of Sherrod, calling her a "friend" who "helped us save our farm." The Atlanta-Constitution Journal similarly reported that Spooner considered Sherrod a "friend for life" and said that Sherrod "worked tirelessly to help the Iron City couple hold onto their land as they faced bankruptcy back in 1986." From the Atlanta-Constitution Journal:

But Spooner, who considers Sherrod a "friend for life," said the federal official worked tirelessly to help the Iron City couple hold onto their land as they faced bankruptcy back in 1986.

"Her husband told her, 'You're spending more time with the Spooners than you are with me,' " Spooner told the AJC."She took probably two or three trips with us to Albany just to help us out."

12:05 p.m.: NewsBusters' Sheppard reports that Sherrod "blamed Fox News and the Tea Party" for her dismissal. Despite noting that Sherrod said on American Morning that Breitbart's edited video "didn't accurately depict what really happened," Noel Sheppard wrote in a NewsBusters post that Sherrod "was forced to resign Monday as a result of racist comments she made at an NAACP gathering in March has blamed Fox News and the Tea Party for her inability to convince her employers of her innocence."

12:10 p.m.: Limbaugh calls Breitbart's heavily edited video of Sherrod "great work." On his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh called Breitbart's heavily edited video of Sherrod "great work," saying that it depicted Sherrod's "supposed racism." He later stated that "[t]he NAACP is as racist an organization as there has been and is in this country."

1:03 p.m.: Video producer confirmed that "the full speech is exactly as Sherrod described ... she goes on to explain learning the error of her initial impression." Talking Points Memo reported that "[t]he Douglas, Ga., company which filmed the banquet for the local NAACP has refused to release" the video until the national NAACP gives him "permission" to post it. However, Johnny Wilkerson, the owner of the video company, told TPM "that the full speech is exactly as Sherrod described, and that she goes on to explain learning the error of her initial impression and helping the farmer keep his farm."

1:36 p.m.: HotAir's Morrissey reports that edited video was "the entirety of the speech [Breitbart] had in his possession." Morrissey reported that Breitbart posted his heavily edited video without having seen the entirety of Sherrod's speech. Morrissey stated: "Sherrod and others can complain about Fox News and the editing of the tape, but two points should be remembered. First, Andrew Breitbart made it clear to me last night that this was the entirety of the speech he had in his possession. He also wants to find the whole speech and is trying to get it."

2:08 p.m.: TPM reports that NAACP is conducting an investigation into Sherrod's case, after initially condemning her remarks. Talking Points Memo reported that the NAACP, after initially condemning Sherrod's remarks, "is now saying it is conducting an investigation of her story and will issue a new statement."

2:15 p.m. (approximately): Erickson tweets that "it seems like the right just got the scalp of a penitent lady." In a Twitter post, RedState.com editor-in-chief Erick Erickson wrote: "I'm hoping there is more to the video of Shirley Sherrod, because otherwise it seems like the right just got the scalp of a penitent lady."

2:34 p.m.: After promoting her interview with Sherrod throughout the 1 p.m. hour, Kelly announces that Sherrod "changed her mind" about appearing on Fox. On America Live, host Megyn Kelly announced that her interview with Sherrod -- which Kelly had touted throughout the show -- was off. Kelly said that Sherrod had "changed her mind," even after Fox had "offered her a considerable amount of time" to "clear the air" and "tell her story."

3:01 p.m.: Brent Bozell slams media for not covering Sherrod's "racist remarks." Despite CNN's interviews with Sherrod and Eloise Spooner, Media Research Council president Brent Bozell said in a statement posted on NewsBusters that "[t]he liberal media are deliberately spiking the shocking video that reveals an NAACP banquet speaker admitting her racist views and actions. We've waited a full 24 hours to see if any coverage of this exposé would surface. So far, nothing but crickets."

3:58 p.m.: Breitbart confirms in a TPMMuckracker interview that he never had the full video of Sherrod's remarks. In an interview with Talking Points Memo, Breitbart confirmed that he never had the full video of Sherrod's remarks. From Talking Points Memo:

The crux of the Shirley Sherrod controversy is what she said outside of the two-minute video clip posted by Big Government -- whether she was, as she claims, telling a story about how she overcame racial prejudice while helping poor farmers in Georgia, or whether the clip is a good encapsulation of her views. So we asked Andrew Breitbart, the founder of Big Government, why he hasn't posted the full video.

"I don't have it," Breitbart told TPMmuckraker in an interview. Breitbart said his source sent him just the edited clips at first, but is in the process of sending the full video.

4 p.m. (approximately): Jake Tapper tweets: "WH says it was 100% Secy Vilsack's call" to ask for Sherrod's resignation. In a Twitter post, ABC News White House correspondent Jake Tapper wrote: "WH says it was 100% Secy Vilsack's call" to ask for Sherrod's resignation.

4 p.m.: Rick Sanchez devotes an entire hour of his show to the accusations against Sherrod.  On CNN's Rick's List, host Rick Sanchez devoted an entire hour to Sherrod, and noted that his show did not run the story when it broke because he did not have "complete perspective for the sake of context":

SANCHEZ: We, by the way, chose not to do the story yesterday, even though we had the story, reason being we thought it was important to try and contact her first, double-down on sources, and try and get a complete perspective for the sake of context.

4:01 p.m.: Hoft continues to assert Sherrod is "racist." In a Gateway Pundit post titled, "Vilsack Stands Behind His Decision to Fire Racist NAACP Speaker Shirley Sherrod," Hoft linked to Sherrod's CNN interview and wrote: "Today, Sherrod told reporters that 'she' was the real victim ... Not the white farmer she neglected to assist." He continued, "Sherrod claims she was harassed by the Obama Administration and forced to resign." Hoft further wrote: "Vilsack stood by his decision to fire Shirley Sherrod for her racists comments caught on tape."

4:03 p.m.*: Big Government highlights Sherrod's statement that Obama admin "made [her] quit because [she] was going to be on Glenn Beck." In a Big Government post, Jeff Dunetz wrote that "Sherrod was forced to resign almost immediately after the video was posted. Incredibly, it seems however that her firing was less about what she said in the speech, and more about the story being broadcast on Fox News."

4:25 p.m.: "White farmer" Spooner appears on Rick's List, says of those smearing Sherrod as racist: They "don't know what they're talking about." On CNN's Rick's List, Roger and Eloise Spooner -- the "white farmer" and his wife whom Sherrod was discussing in the video -- defended Sherrod, saying that those who were smearing her as racist "don't know what they're talking about," and that Sherrod did "her level best" to help them save their farm, which she was ultimately successful in helping them do.

5 p.m.: Beck devotes first 20 minutes of show to Sherrod story. On his Fox News program, Beck aired a clip of Sherrod's CNN interview and asked if this "was a political assassination from the White House or from the NAACP." Beck then said: "Context matters, but we don't have the full video. Andrew Breitbart is trying to get the full video."

5:13 p.m. (approximately): Fox Nation reposts Big Government's Sherrod article about WH pressure to resign.  In a post titled, "Sherrod: White House Made Me Quit 'Because I Was Going to Be on Glenn Beck," Fox Nation linked to Big Government's post of the same title. The link has since been updated and redirects to a different Fox Nation post titled "USDA Reconsidering Sherrod's Ouster Over Racial Comments." The first comments on this post are time-stamped 5:13 p.m., suggesting that Fox Nation originally posted the link to Big Government around that same time:

foxnationtimestamp

5:29 p.m.: Brazile: I "listen[ed] to the entire tape," Sherrod was "taken out of context." On CNN's Situation Room, Donna Brazile said, "I listened to the tape. I took time-out today to listen to the entire tape, unedited, in context. And I can tell you that her statement was taken out of context." She explained that Sherrod "went on to say that her life was about -- not about black and the white but the haves and the havenots" and that "when you listen to her speech and listen to the Spooners, she went out of her way to help this man save his farm just like she helped many black farmer save their land as well."

6:10 p.m.: NAACP releases statement on its investigation into Sherrod case, claims it was "snookered by Fox News and Tea Party Activist Andrew Breitbart." The NAACP released a statement on its investigation into the Sherrod case and concluded that it was "snookered by Fox News and Tea Party Activist Andrew Breitbart":

With regard to the initial media coverage of the resignation of USDA Official Shirley Sherrod, we have come to the conclusion we were snookered by Fox News and Tea Party Activist Andrew Breitbart into believing she had harmed white farmers because of racial bias.

6:41 p.m.: Bret Baier falsely claims, "Fox News didn't even do the story" on Sherrod.  On Fox News' Special Report, host Bret Baier absurdly claimed that Fox News "didn't even do" the Sherrod story.

7:01 p.m.: America's Nightly Scoreboard: "The triumph of Andrew Breitbart over the establishment." On Fox Business' America's Nightly Scoreboard, host David Asman began the show declaring the "triumph of Andrew Breitbart over the establishment." The on-screen text repeated this claim. Asman also referred to Breitbart as "our friend Andrew Breitbart" and stated that the video "shows how inept government bureaucrats can be." 

7:15 p.m.: Breitbart refuses to accept Sherrod's "word that the farmer's wife is the farmer's wife." On CNN's John King USA, Breitbart said to host John King: "If the other video is so important to you in order to push this story, why aren't you doing your reporting?" Breitbart then said: "You're going off of [Sherrod's] word that the farmer's wife is the farmer's wife. What type of extra reporting have you done on this?"

7:45 p.m. (approximately): NAACP releases full video of Sherrod's remarks. The NAACP released the full video of Sherrod's remarks at the NAACP banquet, noting that Breitbart's deceptively edited video "didn't tell the full story" and was "selectively edited to cast her in a negative light."

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by tiredofit10 (July 22, 2010 8:28 am ET)
      13 1
      Good Work! This is the only thing , reporting on wrong doing, which will keep this country truly free.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by eb (July 22, 2010 9:22 am ET)
      20 1
      Fox, by virtue of their lofty position as the so called fair and balanced network, while being so partisan, has backed itself into a corner. They have to present themselves as infallible to their audience. Admitting unfairness, unbalancedness destroys much of the appeal of the network to conservatives.

      Since their definition of fairness means taking sides, their side can never be wrong. They have to be seen as the repository of virtue in their analysis and reporting. The fact that they claim to be fair and balanced while being so consistently reckless makes the infallibility of their programming, as well as the conservatives they champion critical. Also their audience expects them to reinforce their own belief in conservative infallibility.

      The result is that FOX needs news items that show non-conservatives in a negative light and it need such interpretations to be immune to effective criticism that could influence its audience. They can't easily back away from this any more than they can seriously deviate from the idea that non-conservatives are the cause of this countries problems. Now and then they need to twist like a pretzel to maintain these illusions.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by perrycindy2009 (July 22, 2010 11:40 am ET)
        6 1
        that is it in a nutshell
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Obsidion (July 23, 2010 3:54 pm ET)
        8 1
        I hate to disagree with you but you have forgotten one of very important detail about the fox audience. They are completely immune to facts, reason, logic, and in some cases the any form of truth other than what they choose to believe. How many times have you seen fox make some totally absurd claim with little or no evidence what so ever and their audience eats it up in some cases continuing to believe it long after it has been proven false. The sad fact is this incident may wake up a very small number of fox watchers (people who already have some doubts about what they hear in the conservitive echo chamber) but the vast majority will continue to believe the original lie or find some twisted way to blame the whole incident on Obama.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by crimson2 (July 22, 2010 9:26 am ET)
      17 1
      Hey, MMFA, you forgot to link to Breitbart's apology.

      Oh, wait...
      Report Abuse
      • Author by donwelty (July 22, 2010 4:50 pm ET)
        7 1
        (4:39 PM ET)
        I heard on the news that many who acted hastily, the white house and Bill O'Reilly among others have apologized. President Obama suggested that Sherrod condintue working. Bill O apologized for not doing his homework in checking out the story. He could have also apologized for publishing a misleading tape that harmed her reputation. Keith Olbermann had a special opinion and apologized for the president, while referring to Breitbart as "scum." Olbermann basically said that a lot of reasonable people reacted too soon without considering the source.

        I'm still waiting to hear apologies from Breitbart, Hannity, Limbaugh, Beck, Baier, and other right wing nuts. I'm not holding my breath.

        Breitbart is 0 for 2 on major videos. I hope his credibility = 0 for everything else he does.


        Report Abuse
        • Author by mari2jj (July 24, 2010 5:32 pm ET)
          2  
          Breitbart is a serial prevaricator. Never expect him to garner any insight no matter how stupid he looks in public. This episode will be brought up every time he makes some silly hateful claim about anyone. He had little credibility after his trumped up Acorn film, but now he has zip, none, nothing! He has proven himself to be a lousy newsperson without any moral rudder. He hits first and checks later. That is his response to his enemies. His friends on the other hand are beneficiaries of constant lies the other way. Poor thing seems to have no moral rudder at all! He seems totally unaware of minimal journalistic standards or he crosses that line knowingly. Which one of these is the most disgusting is hard to tell
          Report Abuse
      • Author by open_mind (July 23, 2010 9:26 am ET)
        4 1
        I looooove Breitbart's swaggering twit:

        Hey @ericboehlert & the mostly male Caucasian @mmfa 'senior fellows': Get some rest. Tomorrow's gonna be long day & first of many in a row.
        Absolutely hilarious. ROTFLMAO!

        The question is: Will anybody still listen to this Breitbart fraud? Is Fox "News" still going to hype Breitbart like they are Flavor Flav?
        Report Abuse
    • Author by alienofwar (July 22, 2010 9:53 am ET)
      18 1
      So I guess this debunks the whole "Sherrod was fired before Fox News reported the story" lie.

      Breitbart tweeted the story to MMFA like he had a smoking gun here. Hilarious how this backfired in his face. This guy is sick and twisted, needs serious professional help.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by stevensm (July 22, 2010 9:37 pm ET)
        7 1
        Regarding the whole "Sherrod was fired before Fox News reported the story" lie...


        As per MM --- 8:50 p.m.: O'Reilly airs Breitbart's Sherrod video.

        It's been reported by Howard Kurtz that O'Reilly taped his Monday show at 5pm which means he chose to report on the story well BEFORE Foxnews.com reported that Sherrod resigned (at 7:51pm).

        So these arguments being made by the likes of Steve Doocy and others that Fox News didn't touch the story until after she had resigned are a lie. Doocy told this lie on F&F on both Wednesday and Tuesday (as did Dana Perino the day she co-hosted with him).
        Report Abuse
    • Author by ny2nc (July 22, 2010 10:31 am ET)
      9  
      I've composed a little song, to the tune of "Row, Row, Row Your Boat":

      Race, race, let's race-bait
      Bait until you scream
      Smearily, Smearily, Smearily, Smearily,
      Into the mainstream.
      (Media, that is.)


      Now, everyone, let's sing it in a round!

      "Race, Race, let's race bait..."
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Louise08902 (July 22, 2010 11:03 am ET)
      7 1
      Someone called Sherrod to taunt her about this last *Thursday*. She didn't know what the call was about until Monday.

      And here is Breitbart saying that this is just the "first of many." Was he expecting to have more "scandalous" deceptively edited tapes?

      Breitbart sees himself as a warrior against evil Obama; this justifies everything he does.

      He doesn't particularly care if he is debunked 24 or 48 hours later. He will have made his point to his believers - and, if he's "lucky," someone will try to act on their ginned-up outrage.

      He's trying to incite violence - rather like Glenn Beck.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Gravity_78 (July 22, 2010 11:06 am ET)
      6 1
      When I first saw this story it was about noon on Monday on the Huffington Post; the main report was a link to Foxnews.com. So based off that along did not believe it, did not even read it. So for Fox to say they did not report on this race baiting story until Bill O' Reilly is a flat out lie, but lies is all Fox does.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by fairliberal (July 22, 2010 11:13 am ET)
      4 15
      Is the Obama administration so cowardly that they fire someone because of what Fox News MIGHT say? According to Sherrod, when she was asked to resign , the adminisration said she will be on Beck tonight. Well surprize , surprize, Beck didn't even run the story and the following night supported her. Wrong again Obama
      Report Abuse
      • Author by pete592 (July 22, 2010 11:26 am ET)
        13 2
        Wrong again, Fail Liberal.

        Yeah, Beck initially offered Sherrod a token of support in the form of another conspiracy dig at the evil president.

        Then where did he go with it?

        Beck suggests Sherrod should've been made a "czar" because "she fits in with all you Maoists"


        Beck: Sherrod "obviously has some sort of Marxist or redistributionist qualities to her"

        Yeah, it sounds like Beck really holds Sherrod in high regard.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Gravity_78 (July 22, 2010 11:41 am ET)
          6 1
          You act as though you except him to agree with you about his lord and master Glenn Beck: your hoping for to much you know that right?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by pete592 (July 22, 2010 11:56 am ET)
            9 1
            The intent of every reply to FL is not to convert, but to expose.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by righton2 (July 23, 2010 2:29 am ET)
          2 9
          You are doing exactly what was done to start this whole ordeal...a typical lib-er-al move. Take the statement out of context and run with it. Glenn Beck WAS the only one defending Sherrod that day. The snippets that you allude to are not the entire segment so quit your slimy bashing without the facts!
          Report Abuse
          • Author by congero6189599 (July 23, 2010 10:54 am ET)
            6 1
            Yea Glenn was supporting her alright by calling her a Moaist. Cheese and crackers. lol.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by open_mind (July 23, 2010 10:53 pm ET)
            2 1
            Glenn Beck momentarily, accidentally happened onto the correct position by merely being an opportunistic, paranoid contrarian against the Obama Administration. No wonder you're impressed by that little maneuver.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by eb (July 22, 2010 12:24 pm ET)
        5 1
        Is the Obama administration so cowardly that they fire someone because of what Fox News MIGHT say?

        Well I guess the lesson here is to not believe Fox news.

        The other lesson is to be brave and stand up to these conservative media celebrity bullies and loudly denounce their lies.

        Where is all that compassionate conservatism we always hear about?
        Where is all that moral virtue we hear conservatives claim they are the protectors of?

        Conservatives act like they are above ideological based actions and interpretations? They like to pretend that. This whole episode reveals that big lie. The ideology guides everything with these conservatives.

        For modern conservatives, its all about winning, not solving problems.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by New Frontier (July 22, 2010 1:08 pm ET)
        3  
        Beck didn't even run the story
        What can one say? The avoidance of inconvenient facts must run in the right-wing families. They ALL do it.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Ro (July 22, 2010 3:22 pm ET)
        6  
        Beck didn't even run the story

        Despite claim that "context matters," Beck played heavily edited Sherrod clip on radio.

        Liar.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by scoooter (July 22, 2010 12:08 pm ET)
      8 1
      I want to see Breitbart sued into non-existence. There is no punishment harsh enough for this pig.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Ilovemoney (July 23, 2010 1:19 pm ET)
        2 2
        why should he be sued, the clips he posted showed one of her speaking about how she changed and sees the world differently without race. that clip itself negates any legal action. SHE WONT WIN.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by hillbilly4u (July 22, 2010 12:09 pm ET)
      6 1
      On John King's Tuesday show, Breitbart claims early in the interview that he received the tape segment in March but chose not to use it until the NAACP accused the Tea Party of racism (although they only claimed there were racist 'elements' in the Tea Party). About 1/2 hour later, after King somewhat cornered him and brought up that he said he received the tape in March, Breitbart hemmed and hawed then said he didn't receive the tape in March but was only made aware of them.

      I found that to be conclusive evidence that Breitbart is a liar. Please review Tuesday's show and consider posting that blatant flip-flop.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by New Frontier (July 22, 2010 12:26 pm ET)
      6  
      Very thorough, precise and factual work, MMFA. Therefore the Fox News fans and Tea Partiers will hate you even more.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by ellemonsters (July 22, 2010 12:54 pm ET)
        4  
        It seems the angrier they are, the more mistakes they make. The more mistakes they make, the angrier they get. Implosion is imminent.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Space-Pedestrian (July 22, 2010 1:17 pm ET)
      3 11
      From the L.A. Times with respect to Sherrod's resignation and the airing of Fox's coverage of the story:

      "Michael Clemente, senior vice president of news editorial, said the network’s news programs reported the story with caution. “When I heard about this Monday morning and saw it on Breitbart’s website, I said, ‘OK, could be a story, let’s check it out,’ ” Clemente said. “We did the normal fact-finding we would do on any story.”

      At an afternoon editorial meeting Monday, Clemente urged the staff to first get the facts and obtain comment from Sherrod before going on air, according to internal notes from the meeting that were provided to The Times. “Let’s make sure we do this right,” he said.

      Sherrod ended up resigning Monday afternoon, hours before O’Reilly broke the story on his show. The first reported piece on Fox News, by correspondent James Rosen, aired on Tuesday morning, and included a second video clip that added context to Sherrod’s comments."

      Why won't MMFA criticize the USDA or NAACP for throwing Sherrod under the bus? There's plenty of blame to go around, let's give everyone culpable a piece of the pie.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Hasa Diga Eebowai (July 22, 2010 1:30 pm ET)
        9 2
        Why won't MMFA criticize the USDA or NAACP for throwing Sherrod under the bus?
        They aren't a media organization.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by pete592 (July 22, 2010 1:30 pm ET)
        5 2
        The USDA and NAACP are not media organizations, that's why.

        MMFA's columnists may have an opinion on the matter though, but I haven't read all of the columns or blog posts to know for sure.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by New Frontier (July 22, 2010 1:37 pm ET)
        8 1
        Why won't MMFA criticize the USDA or NAACP for throwing Sherrod under the bus
        Sorry, but did we miss your criticism of Breitbart??
        Report Abuse
        • Author by pete592 (July 22, 2010 1:48 pm ET)
          7  
          Don't know... but SP is on record in regard to Sherrod:

          "The farmer and his wife got what they wanted and don't care that Sherrod is a racist. But she is still racist. Further, she resigned, so that's about as much of an admission as I need to hear."



          Report Abuse
          • Author by Space-Pedestrian (July 22, 2010 2:08 pm ET)
              5

            There was no reason for her to lose her job and the USDA should have looked more closely at what was going on before forcing her to resign.


            -me, a day later than your quote after more of the news broke

            If you can give the USDA a pass for pulling the trigger too fast, surely you'll forgive me. ;)

            I can admit that I was wrong. In light of all of the facts she should not have been forced to resign.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by New Frontier (July 22, 2010 2:18 pm ET)
              5  
              If you can give the USDA a pass for pulling the trigger too fast
              Want to show us where Pete or anyone here is giving the USDA a pass?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by redrage (July 23, 2010 8:08 am ET)
                4  
                No doubt. It's not giving anyone a pass when you're simply sticking to the point of the article/conversation. Trolls get so upset when you don't follow along with their attempts to derail a conversation.
                Report Abuse
            • Author by congero6189599 (July 22, 2010 2:35 pm ET)
              10  
              What only yesterday you were adamant about her being a racist. Even saying YOU heard the whole speech and nothing in it vindicated her. Even defending the racist attacks against her as "retailiation",the ends justifies the means you essentially said. No amount of reason or facts would budge you about Brietbart's history or Fauxs past use of race to divide would convince you. All the post YOU made arguing how racist she wss now you have changed your tune. Ok I guess if the NAACP can forgive George Wallace, and Shirley Sherrod can overcome her experiences your hyprocrisy and support for the racist attacks against Ms. Sherrod can be forgiven.
              Report Abuse
            • Author by internet soldier (July 22, 2010 3:23 pm ET)
              9  
              The full version of Sherrod's remarks in no way diminish the intent and inherent racism of her words. I fear you are the one being dishonest.

              Her words are clear enough to demonstrate her internal disdain for whites, and she is in fact a racist.

              To repeat, I have seen the whole video and the unedited text in no way diminishes her racism.


              That was you, two days ago. Clearly you didn't immediately accept the evidence that vindicated in the eyes of any sane person. Maybe you're still clinging to the belief that she is a racist and the video proves it, but don't really want to admit it. Either way, it was really bad to unquestioningly accept the edited videos in the first place.

              I'm not sure why you guys keep bringing up the fact that NAACP and USDA initially brought Breitbart's sharade. What exactly does it change? It sure doesn't change the fact you guys were eager to be whipped into another frenzy of distraction by another shiny object. It had been so long since you had had your fill of red meat. Many of you were ready to get suckered, ACORN-style, don't try to deny it.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by congero6189599 (July 22, 2010 3:55 pm ET)
                5  
                <crikets>
                Report Abuse
                • Author by internet soldier (July 22, 2010 5:03 pm ET)
                  9  
                  The moment I saw the Sherrod story break, I started salivating. I just knew the little gnats would not be able to resist that glowing green light. Unsurprisingly, within a day it had been definatively proven that Breitbart had doctored the video. But not before some of our usual suspects at MMFA were already driven into a frenzy.

                  That was certainly great entertainment. But what is even more fun is watching the one's, like failib and SP, who didn't have the sense to dissappear when it was clear they'd been had. At first, when the full video was released, many trolls were in denial. Now, hilariously, most of them are attacking the Obama administration and the NAACP for being suckered by the Sherrod video, which none of them had the sense to question either. All the while, they now pretend Breitbart doesn't even exist. They don't seem to know that by remaining obstinate, they're making themselves look more ridiculous by the hour.
                  Report Abuse
        • Author by srichardson (July 22, 2010 11:39 pm ET)
          1  
          These people are idiots! Thank goodness for you guys for finding their hypocrisy through comments they've previously posted. It is shocking to me that these right wing nutjobs can justify the so called conservative media's attempts to bring down Obama and his administration, even when they use fabricated info or info edited to make those in the administration look bad.
          Honestly though, reading the stupidity that these people put in their comments makes my blood pressure go through the roof.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by srichardson (July 22, 2010 11:39 pm ET)
          4  
          These people are idiots! Thank goodness for you guys for finding their hypocrisy through comments they've previously posted. It is shocking to me that these right wing nutjobs can justify the so called conservative media's attempts to bring down Obama and his administration, even when they use fabricated info or info edited to make those in the administration look bad.
          Honestly though, reading the stupidity that these people put in their comments makes my blood pressure go through the roof.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by bilbo_dies (July 22, 2010 1:49 pm ET)
        4  
        Why won't MMFA criticize the USDA or NAACP for throwing Sherrod under the bus? There's plenty of blame to go around, let's give everyone culpable a piece of the pie.

        Because it isn't their job.

        From the mission statement:

        Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Space-Pedestrian (July 22, 2010 2:09 pm ET)
            7
          Redundant much?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by bilbo_dies (July 22, 2010 4:00 pm ET)
            4  
            Redundant much?

            You asked the question.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by internet soldier (July 22, 2010 4:24 pm ET)
            6  
            Redundancy wouldn't be required if it weren't for all the slow learners in our midst.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by left hook (July 23, 2010 8:23 am ET)
          6 3
          If MMFA is really sincere in trying to provide a service correcting misinformation "For America", they should do it for both the left and right. Their mission statement insinuates that only the right provides misinformation. If they are doing it "For America", should they monitor, analyze, and correct all misinformation, not just the right's. That is what is best "for America". This divisiveness is what hurting this country more than anything right now....To constantly insinuate that the right is always wrong, as Olbermann did the other night, is hypocritical at best.....To claim that Fox News and all right wing media outlets are news organizations is ludicrous and hypocritical. MSNBC is no better than Fox, especially when MSNBC has repeatedly said that all Tea Party members are racist based on the few extreme right people in the group that may have had a couple of racist signs at rallies. But when Fox tries to expose the Black Panthers as intimidators and racists, Maddow says that the right is wrongfully portraying the Black Panthers based on a couple extreme members of the group....Hello?? Hypocritical? Absolutely! There is no real news organizations out there anymore. Everyone has turned into opinion networks. No one tells both sides of an issue...Fox gives the right side of things and MSNBC gives the left side of things....That is what hurting this country.....
          Report Abuse
          • Author by congero6189599 (July 23, 2010 10:41 am ET)
            3 1
            I like how you provide quotes to support your arguments.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by drstone_sr@verizon.net (July 23, 2010 11:23 am ET)
            3 5
            Media Matters is as biased as they say Fox News is.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by FactsReason&Logic (July 23, 2010 2:04 pm ET)
              6 1
              Yes, MMFA's mission statement would suggest it only monitors conservative media...what you see is what you get. However, Fox News calims to be Fair & Balanced,a noble objective yet one they continue to miss day after day.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by open_mind (July 23, 2010 11:03 pm ET)
                1 1
                Ding! Ding! Ding! Summed up nicely!

                I would like to add that one group is supposedly a part of the media and the other is a media critic. To suggest their roles are the least bit analogous is to be horrifically intellectually dishonest.
                Report Abuse
            • Author by CoolSlaw (July 23, 2010 2:48 pm ET)
              3 1
              Media Matters is as biased as they say Fox News is.


              Bias and mission is one thing, lies are another. See here are the two VERY BIG differences:

              1)Fox news claims to be a "fair and balanced" news source while media matters clearly states their purpose is to monitor conservative media misinformation.

              2)Fox news has been caught lying and distorting and misleading their audience again and again, while I would challenge you to find one article here based on a provable lie (not that you DON'T LIKE, but a demonstrable lie).
              Report Abuse
      • Author by eb (July 22, 2010 2:16 pm ET)
        6  
        There's plenty of blame to go around, let's give everyone culpable a piece of the pie.

        Why are we even discussing this. Breitbart wanted to smear the NAACP for having the gall to tell the Tea Parties that they might have some racist elements among their ranks. By Fox/Rush standards, that is pretty mild.

        How does Breitbart/Fox react? By falsely smearing someones reputation and continuing to after the truth comes out.

        Why won't MMFA criticize the USDA or NAACP for throwing Sherrod under the bus?

        Many posters here have criticized the lack of backbone by Sherrod's employer. I guess spaceman misses the irony of these organizations taking a right wing media allegation seriously and then demonstrating a quick reaction against anti white prejudice.

        Are we going to stop with the Obama and the NAACP is racist game now that we are so shocked at the overreaction by the USDA and NAACP. I doubt it!

        Report Abuse
        • Author by eb (July 22, 2010 2:21 pm ET)
          4  
          Just to clarify:

          Why are we even discussing this. Breitbart wanted to smear the NAACP for having the gall to tell the Tea Parties that they might have some racist elements among their ranks. By Fox/Rush standards, that is a pretty mild so called attack from the NAACP.

          Rush/Fox make allegations that are much more severe and general. They call people and entire organizations marxist, far left, socialist... all the time.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by fairliberal (July 22, 2010 3:30 pm ET)
            8
          "Why are we even discussing this. Breitbart wanted to smear the NAACP for having the gall to tell the Tea Parties that they might have some racist elements among their ranks"

          No Breitbart wanted to expose the lies of both the NAACP and more specifically Ben Jealous and the 3 congressmen who lied about the spitting incident. Show me proof cries the left, unless it is one of their own, then no proof is needed. Hey I wonder when someone will step foward to claim that $100,000?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by congero6189599 (July 22, 2010 3:50 pm ET)
            11 2
            You bigot thats all you have no one has come forward so therefore it can't be true? Your calling heroes of the civil rights movement liars? Yet you defend and cling to seconds of a video that was used to smear the NACCP and Ms. Sherrod and now has been acepted by everyone that is not a right-wing zealot as made up. Tell us why any proof would convince you when you still cling to the Brietbart lies about Ms. Sherrod? That there were racist elements connected to the tea-party is undeniable. Mark Williams being the most obvious are you denying that up until recently he was part of the tea-party movement. Are you denying that this obvious racist is still connected to the Tea-Party Express. You must lead a boring life to get your thrills by posting BS on this site. Get a life.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by Johaely (July 22, 2010 8:28 pm ET)
            2 1
            How does this "expose the lies" of the NAACP? By tarnishing the reputation of an innocent woman and attempting to do that with an organization he was only trying to destroy the organization for having the gall of thinking bad about the NAACP.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by redrage (July 23, 2010 9:50 am ET)
            7 1
            Here's the difference.

            Example (hypothetical): You say that a congressman has added a clause to the Healthcare bill allowing for Paris Hilton to pay for anti-depressants for her dog.

            Someone else says, "prove it."

            All you have to do is submit a link or other documentation to substantiate it's in the bill. That's pretty easy.

            Now, I was married 15 years ago in August. On that date my wife said "I do." I have no video of this event. I cann't prove by video that she said it. But given the circumstances, you should take my word for it.

            Given reputations, comparing Breitbart and his ilk, to the congressman who were spit on, who should we believe? The civil rights champions, or the Breitbart?

            You don't have to side with Breitbart an Beck to be conservative. Repdiate them (yeah, that's right repudiate not "refudiate") and you're credibility is enhanced and you'll sleep better at night.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by rumpleteasermom (July 22, 2010 2:33 pm ET)
        8 2
        Why won't MMFA criticize the USDA or NAACP for throwing Sherrod under the bus? There's plenty of blame to go around, let's give everyone culpable a piece of the pie.


        Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that the Vilsack and Jealous have both issued very gracious and very detailed unequivocal apologies to Sherrod and neither Breitbart nor Fox has owned up to their part in the drama?

        Oh, and while it is true that O'Reilly was the first time it aired on Fox's TV programming, it was on the Fox website much earlier in the day and with a much more vitriolic tone.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by internet soldier (July 22, 2010 4:26 pm ET)
          3 1
          Not to mention MMFA exists to criticize MEDIA outlets, not politicians, for the 1,298,784,532nd time.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by fairliberal (July 22, 2010 5:14 pm ET)
          1 9
          "Oh, and while it is true that O'Reilly was the first time it aired on Fox's TV programming, it was on the Fox website much earlier in the day and with a much more vitriolic tone"

          That is a flat out lie, according to mmfa this is what Fox's website had on it about the time the Obama administration was canning Sherrod...



          "Fox News amplifies Breitbart's deceptively edited video. On July 19, FoxNews.com reported: "Days after the NAACP clashed with Tea Party members over allegations of racism, a video has surfaced showing an Agriculture Department official regaling an NAACP audience with a story about how she withheld help to a white farmer facing bankruptcy." The FoxNews.com article further reported that "[t]he video clip was first posted by BigGovernment.com" and that "FoxNews.com is seeking a response from both the NAACP and the USDA." The article is no longer available on FoxNews.com but was republished on another website"

          Perhaps you should double check your info.

          And while you note Ben Jealous' apology to Sherrod, I wonder why he has not apologized to the Tea Party members he falsly accused of hiding behind signs that said lynch Obama and lynch Holder.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by rumpleteasermom (July 22, 2010 5:38 pm ET)
            11 2
            Perhaps you want to look ^up there again.

            Specifically here:
            1:40 p.m. (approximately): Fox Nation accuses Sherrod of "discrimination caught on tape" before she resigned.


            And for Jealous apologizing to the Tea Party - did you not notice that the original complaint from the NAACP was that there were racist elements that should be weeded out (as opposed to calling them all racists which is how Fox is reporting it, I suspect) and then lo and behold, the Tea Party Express and Mark Williams were banished. Um, gee, should they apologize for being right? For noticing?
            Report Abuse
          • Author by open_mind (July 23, 2010 11:14 pm ET)
            3 1
            I wonder why [Jealous} has not apologized to the Tea Party members he falsly accused of hiding behind signs that said lynch Obama and lynch Holder.
            I don't know anything about those supposed comments. I do know that the NAACP referred to "racist elements" within the Tea Party Movement, which was their main point and is pretty much irrefutable at this moment. As far as I'm concerned, what the NAACP said about these "racist elements" was demonstrably true and Breitbart's effort to show some sort of false equivalence pathetically fell flat on its face. The NAACP has apologized to Sherrod and that is the only person that deserves one here.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by msaz (July 22, 2010 2:04 pm ET)
      2 7
      Should the accusations really be thrown at fox or by a reactionary USDA. The story was only reported on after she was fired, and a number of media outlets on both sides said there should have been due process before firing this woman. Had the USDA took a stance of research and clarity this woman would have never had to go through this. Also it is about time we stop breaking things down to race. We should as Americans never slump to breaking things down race. The only way to move past race is to remember the motto that graces our seal E Pluribus Unum (out of many, one) we are one people equal and free.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by eb (July 22, 2010 2:29 pm ET)
        4  
        The story was only reported on after she was fired, and a number of media outlets on both sides said there should have been due process before firing this woman.

        So then we can bury the this idea that the Obama administration is not anti-white? We can agree that the New Black Panther DOJ decision does not indicate that the administration is anti-white? The over reaction was shows how wrong the Fox/Beck/rush version of the administration is.

        The story was only reported on after she was fired

        This has been debunked, but at any rate, the question should be, why didn't fox report on the unfair firing of a woman who was victimized by a right wing smear campaign? Instead, according to your version of things, she got fired and then she was victimized by a right wing smear campaign
        Report Abuse
        • Author by congero6189599 (July 22, 2010 2:40 pm ET)
          3 1
          Exactly!!! Lets put all these lies to rest and not rush to judgement. We'll see.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by eb (July 22, 2010 3:12 pm ET)
          3  
          should read: So then we can bury the this idea that the Obama administration is anti-white?
          Report Abuse
    • Author by repsac3 (July 22, 2010 3:10 pm ET)
      5  
      I know MMfA is a media watch site, but I'm curious about one other tick on the timeline, even though it's not specifically media-related...

      Who was the mysterious person who e-mailed Shirley Sherrod to "taunt" her about her NAACP speech on Thursday, 7/15, four days before it was posted by disgraced conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart? Together with "who so selectively edited the video that Shirley Sherrod appeared to say exactly the opposite of what actually she did say, and is that legally actionable?," these are the questions that keep running through my mind... ...and will, until I get answers...
      Report Abuse
      • Author by congero6189599 (July 22, 2010 3:19 pm ET)
        2 1
        Yes, me too. When will journalist begin to answer them?
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Libisbad (July 22, 2010 3:26 pm ET)
      3 1
      I never trusted Fox. But the fact that the Obama admin. Did makes them look extremely naive.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by donwelty (July 22, 2010 5:09 pm ET)
      3  
      Prejudice is something we all have. We all have biases for people who are like us, and against anyone who is different whether by religion, national origin, economic class, profession, or skin color. When these are exagerated. During WW II, Japanese people who looked different, talked different, and acted different were discriminated against--even the citizens of the US. A supreme court case spoke of "yellow peril." Many of us have done some stupid things in regards to people who are different. Many of us later realized that they were stupid and realized that we had or still have some of these prejudices. Sherrod realized it also, and that's why she spoke.

      It appears that many of the wingnuts may be unaware of their prejudices, and thus claim that they don't exist even though blatently displaying evidence of them.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by case1000 (July 22, 2010 6:19 pm ET)
        4
      I would think that the bigger story is that race is becoming a hotter topic every year. I doubt we have made much progress between the races. By this person that started the smear campaign against Sherrod only showed how sensitive it is when the left threw her under the bus as fast as the right. The night of the announcement of her firing the White House even said they stood behind the USDA chief. Then CNN thankfully blew the wheels out from under the story.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by kyle b.c. (July 22, 2010 9:05 pm ET)
         
      i'm confused. why did the White House think it was gonna be on Glenn Beck and why wasn't it? were they just wrong? did Beck change his mind about it? this is what i wanna know.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by ronhohn (July 23, 2010 2:34 am ET)
      4 1
      My question is:
      If Breitbart wanted to show that the NAACP is racist and had to go back a quarter of a century, how much credibility does that give to his claim. Having to go back that far for 1 occurrence and then having to doctor that up?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by jaabqn79 (July 23, 2010 4:04 am ET)
      2 5
      Why do you folks at MMs refuse to report the truth. The reason why Brietbart showed the video was to show the reaction of the people in the audiance clapping when Sherrod stated she discrimated against a white farmer. That is the story you are missing. Her change in her racist ways is not a story. Please tell the truth.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by congero6189599 (July 23, 2010 9:50 am ET)
        3 2
        How can someone discriminate against someone when they helped them save their farm? You are missing the truth.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by left hook (July 23, 2010 10:00 am ET)
            4
          Ultimately saved their farm....she stated that she had thoughts about not saving their farm and not giving them her full force of her authority to do so....If that was reversed and a white lady had those thoughts but ultimately did the right thing, would you have the same feelings? I would hope so, but I seriously doubt it. I'm sure you would be calling her a racist....that's sad thing about americans these days, specifically those at the edges. Nobody wants to admit when they are wrong. Nobody wants to do their research. It's a race (as in track meet-didn't want to confuse anyone) to who can get the info out there the fastest....
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Johaely (July 23, 2010 7:06 pm ET)
            3 1
            The story was about how she overcame that and had a change of heart and in the end helped save the farm.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by congero6189599 (July 23, 2010 10:05 am ET)
        5 2
        CNN's Cooper dismantles Breitbart's false claims
        Cooper: "The fact is, there was no applause when Ms. Sherrod was talking about the white farmer. Breitbart's claim that the audience was applauding as she "described how she maltreated the white farmer" is demonstrably false. Contrary to Breitbart's claim, the audience does not applaud or cheer at any point during the story about her interaction with the farmer. On his July 21 show, CNN's Anderson Cooper aired comments about "applause" Breitbart made on John King, USA and noted, "The fact is, there was no applause when Ms. Sherrod was talking about the white farmer." He added: "You know, Breitbart also said today that there were cheers over racist comments. Again, the facts do not bear him out."

        NAACP chapter president: We were not "cheering racism." Also on Cooper's July 21 show, Hal Pressley, the president of the NAACP chapter that held the event, said that he was in attendance and that no one in the audience was "cheering racism," and that they "were acknowledging that we understand what she is saying, where she's coming from."

        Speech attendee Pearson: "totally untrue" that "we were cheering something on and then ... learned something else about it." Another attendee, Olivia Pearson, told Cooper, "to say that, you know, we were cheering something on and then learned out -- and learned something else about it, that's totally untrue. I have known Shirley for -- for 11 years, and I know that that's not her character."

        This story can found on this site as Anderson Cooper debunks Brietbarts lies or something to that effect. This is just rediculous.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by congero6189599 (July 23, 2010 10:07 am ET)
          3 2
          CNN's Cooper detonates Breitbart's NAACP applause falsehood
          Report Abuse
          • Author by open_mind (July 23, 2010 11:22 pm ET)
            4 1
            But how are us liberals supposed to be believed when conservatives are so amazingly capable of reading our minds and understanding our "true" thoughts and motivations even better than we can do ourselves? Let's face it. They got us so figured out, we didn't even know we were thinking what conservatives absolutely know we were thinking. Darn them!

            ; )
            Report Abuse
      • Author by e.d. - e.d. (July 23, 2010 11:22 am ET)
        3 1
        No one applauded the Sherrod description of her past feelings of prejudice (prejudgment is not racism). The few members of the NAACP audience that responded vocally to her negative feelings toward helping the white farmer were acknowledging that they recognized that it was hard to help someone who appeared to be so much like the one who killed her father. She prejudged him but helped him any way - this is not racism. Racism is when you use your authority to oppress those whom you dislike because they seem different (Andrew Breitbart et al come to mind here). Sherrod grew to understand that although the poor farmer appeared to be like the farmer who killed her father in fact he was more like the farmers that she had dedicated her life to serve. She had an epiphany that changed her life by changing the “ other” into “us”. Andrew Breitbart, et al, do not want to grow past their initial prejudgment that to be different in some way means that the person is “less valuable”. These people are uncomfortable with these illogical judgments until validated by their peer group. They use all the effort and authority and resources to marginalize “the others” - this is racism. Logic and truth are not important when the information media is used to market this need. Sadly this racism is too often perpetuated by a cult-like following, glorification and financial reward.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Johaely (July 23, 2010 12:50 pm ET)
        2 1
        Yet two things fall flat. First the conctent: There was no clapping. I saw the video in the way that Fox and Friends presented it. there was no clapping. Second is the intent: He was showing it in order to discredit the NAACP for even considering that there are racists in the Tea Party. He didn't prove that there weren't racists affiliated with the tea party, he was aiming to destroy/discredit the NAACP. You yourself admitted that her change of heart was not the point of the story, the point was to show the "racism" in the NAACP.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by cmyk (July 23, 2010 3:08 pm ET)
        5 1
        Did you watch the full 45 minute video? For the first 15 minutes she describes the deep south that she grew up in - the one that probably everyone in the audience grew up in or was told about. Her father was murdered, allegedly, according to witnesses, by a white man, who was not indicted. A relative had been lynched. A cross had been burned on mother's property. This was just some of the reality that led to her frame of mind on that day 25 years ago in which her first instinct was not to help the farmer as much as she could have. She went on to help the farmer in a big way. She learned. She grew as a human being.

        The audience wasn't clapping at racism against whites. They were identifying with her.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by drstone_sr@verizon.net (July 23, 2010 11:19 am ET)
      2 4
      You guys should be asking yourself this question who gave the Copy of the edited video to Andrew Breitbart. The only two copies of this video that we understand were in the hands of NAACP and the Videographer who filmed the March 27th NAACP meeting. It sounds to me like someone is or was trying to bring more division to this already very divided natiion. And I really think Andrew Breitbart was trying to show the Racism of the NAACP more than attack Shirly. Now ask yourself these two questions Why did the NAACP jump so fast to support the request of the White House for Shirlys’ resignation if and they did have a full copy of the video? Second Why did the White House jump to an emidiate decision to ask for Shirlys’ resignation? One more point why did the White House do all this before the video was even on YouTube? The White House did this all on Monday and the Media didn’t Even talk about it till Tuesday that included Fox. Why aren’t the People on this site following the time line. Your Trashing Fox News when they broke the story on Tuesday a full day after the White House has asked and gotten Shirly Sherrods resignation. Are we so blind as to the Truth instead of the biases that the Major Media keeps throwing at us everyday. I am asking thosse who ready things from this site and or any other when you read a story don’t do what the White House did jump the gun do your own research and find out who is telling the truth. I have learned to find out first make comments later. So if someone with media power is trying to keep this country divded they are getting their way BIG TIME.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Harlander (July 23, 2010 1:13 pm ET)
        1 6
        The left wing tactic is known as culture jamming. It is used to embarrass corporations like Walmart, McDonalds, Nike and others. It has now mutated over to politics by the more progressive elements of the far left.
        The NAACP was in charge of this hoax from day one in order to discredit the Tea Party and FOX News. After all, it was the NAACP's video.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by congero6189599 (July 23, 2010 1:16 pm ET)
        4 2
        I wish you were better informed. Your whole post has been debunked here just read some of the articles concerning the subject it's getting tiring having to repeat them everytime some ignorant poster comes here and post the same bunk time after time. Also please source the material you are cutting and pasting from.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by mary59 (July 23, 2010 5:04 pm ET)
          3 1
          don't cha know it was the white house trying to make themselves look ill informed? and the naacp trying to make itself look uninformed. and, it was ..... tilt*%@#$ ..... mutant pigeons from the planet zeenon.

          anyone but breitbart & faux news trying to gin up a smear.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by Ilovemoney (July 23, 2010 1:28 pm ET)
      1 4
      Why did the NAACP not release the Tape immediately and support Sherrod? Doesnt anybody think its SCARY that within 3 hours, Ms. Sherrod was pulled over on the highway and forced to resign. That is messed up. Why are people blaming fox news if it was the white house, of wait sorry the SEcretary of agg, that fired her so abruptley without any due process.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by military_husband (July 23, 2010 4:30 pm ET)
        5 1
        This is my 2nd favorite BS line of questioning about this story. (The first being the whole "the tape shows the audience was racist in their reaction" BS).

        After all of the complaints from the right about this White house dragging it's feet and stonewalling about things like the New Black Panther story and the Van Jones crap, now the complaint is they acted too fast? really?

        Oh and READ THE ARTICLE AGAIN. FOX News was already running with the story before she resigned.
        1:40 p.m. (approximately): Fox Nation accuses Sherrod of "discrimination caught on tape" before she resigned.
        After news broke that Sherrod resigned, the post's headline was changed to read "Obama Official Resigns After Discrimination Caught on Tape"


        And the guy who filmed the event and had the tape had to get permission from the NAACP before he could post it. Clearly he could not just put the footage up to clear up the false story Brietbart had up.

        As for the NAACP, they had to figure out when the tape was made, if they had the tape, where it was, and if they did not have it, get it from the person who taped the event. After getting it they would want to review the tape before releasing it. By the time they even knew about the tape is was already being posted all over the internet. Please use a little common sense about this. Think of all of the events like this the NAACP hosts over the coarse of a year. Think about how little was posted about where the tape came from and when it was shot(and I am betting THAT was done on purpose to keep people from finding the full context).
        The first time I saw the video, my first question was why did it start in the middle of a thought and end before she finished her point? If Brietbart had wanted facts rather than just being super partisan and wanting anything to fit his narrative, he would have asked those questions. If Fox News wanted to be taken seriously as a News organization, they would have asked for the full transcript before posting the video. They would have asked the NAACP about it or Sherrod before posting it, but they didn't. THAT is the story here. Fox has long trusted people like Drudge and Brietbart and finally REAL news organizations stepped up and show what journalism looks like. You verify information. You check the facts. You ask the really easy questions like why is this so edited. Instead Fox showed it is not a news organization.
        Report Abuse