Media denounce Breitbart's tactics, highlight his loss of credibility
With the implosion of Andrew Breitbart's smear of Shirley Sherrod, many in the media have criticized Breitbart's tactics, called on him to apologize, or pointed out how this episode has depleted any credibility he may have had.
Media: Breitbart "is not a journalist," but a "bull[y]" and "slander[er]" who can't be trusted
Fox's Smith: "[W]e did not and do not trust the source." Discussing coverage of the Sherrod story on the July 21 edition of Fox News' Studio B, host Shepard Smith said that his show declined to report on it initially because "we didn't who shot it, we didn't know when it was shot, we didn't know the context of the statement, and because of the history of videos on the site where it was posted. In short, we did not and do not trust the source."
CNN's Cooper: Breitbart actions are "a classic example of what is wrong with our national discourse." On the July 21 edition of CNN's Anderson Cooper 360, Cooper said that Breitbart's video clips of Sherrod "were clearly edited to deceive and slander Miss Sherrod," and that Breitbart's efforts to "weasel his way out of taking responsibility for what he did to Miss Sherrod is a classic example of what is wrong with our national discourse." Cooper continued:
COOPER: "The truth matters." Breitbart posted the clip on Monday on his website. Nearly everything Mr. Breitbart said about Shirley Sherrod was either wrong or somehow slanted to make a larger point about racism and the NAACP. He initially said her speech showed a government official who allowed racist views to influence her work with a white farmer. But we now know it was a speech about her change of heart 24 years ago, when she wasn't even at the USDA. Today, Mr. Breitbart could have just apologized, said he was wrong, but he didn't. Bullies never do, nor do ideologues in our divided country. Instead, he now claims this was never about Miss Sherrod, it was about the NAACP and what he says was their racism based on the audience's reaction to her speech.
[...]
Well, the fact is there was no applause when Miss Sherrod was talking about the white farmer. And we'll talk to members of the audience who were there that night about the reaction they saw and heard and that they themselves had. Now, Breitbart also said today that there were cheers over racist comments. Again, the facts do not bear him out. The truth matters. The closest Mr. Breitbart came to an apology today was this comment.
BREITBART [video clip]: I feel bad that they made this about her, and I feel sorry that they made this about her. I'm not sure if that was done because they rushed to judgment or whether they wanted to make about Shirley versus me, because that's what it's become.
COOPER: He goes on to say he's sympathetic to what Miss Sherrod has gone through. Notice the passive voice here, because his words, quote, "they went after her," and not the NAACP. It's like the arsonist saying, "I'm sorry, ma'am, for the water damage done by firefighters." He started the fire. Andrew Breitbart said the clip he first posted proved black racism happening now at the USDA and the NAACP. It didn't. He said it proved racism in the crowd. You can decide for yourself about that. We'll play you the tapes and you'll talk -- you'll hear from audience members. He claims to feel sorry for the victim, but blames others acting on his misleading information for hurting her.
It was a phony story. It isn't the first, and it isn't the first about race. But why let the truth stop you when you're making political points? That's the way a lot of people seem to think these days, on the left and the right.
Politico's Ben Smith: "Breitbart's sites now have a growing credibility problem." In a July 22 Politico blog post on the Sherrod story, Ben Smith wrote: "The nice thing about the new-media space is how quickly it self-corrects. Breitbart's sites now have a growing credibility problem." Smith added: "And for all the talk of the speed of the Internet, online, like offline, reporting is a long, endless game, and with fewer and fewer trusted institutions to dispense it at will, credibility is a scarce and extremely valuable commodity."
MSNBC's O'Donnell: "I think [Breitbart] has lost his standing to present videos to the country at any time." On the July 22 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe, Lawrence O'Donnell said that Breitbart "has lost his standing to present videos to the country at any time," adding that the ACORN videos promoted by Breitbart were "manipulated in ways that were grotesquely unfair to the people in those scenes."
NPR* ombudsman: Breitbart's treatment of Sherrod shows he "is not a journalist." Commenting on the Sherrod story, NPR* ombudsman Alicia Shepard said, "Any journalist would seek comment [from the story's subject before publishing]. If Breitbart does not, he is not a journalist."
Jonah Goldberg: Sherrod is "owed apolog[y]" from Breitbart. In a July 21 National Review Online blog post, Jonah Goldberg wrote that Sherrod is "owed apologies from pretty much everyone, including my good friend Andrew Breitbart." Goldberg added that Breitbart "says he received the video in its edited form and I believe him. But the relevant question is, would he have done the same thing over again if he had seen the full video from the outset? I'd like to think he wouldn't have. Because to knowingly turn this woman into a racist in order to fight fire with fire with the NAACP is unacceptable."
John McCormack: Breitbart's clip "was unfair," she "deserves an apology." In a July 21 post, The Weekly Standard's John McCormack wrote that "Breitbart's posting of the partial clip, which leaves out crucial information, was unfair to Sherrod," adding that, "Sherrod deserves an apology from Breitbart for posting the edited video."
David Frum: "Breitbart continues to defend his own 'ends justify the means' bending of the truth." Former Bush speechwriter David Frum wrote in a July 21 FrumForum blog post that Breitbart will "survive, and undamaged" and that "There will be no apology or statement of regret for distributing a doctored tape to defame and destroy someone. There will be not even a flutter of interest among conservatives in discussing Breitbart's role." Frum added that "Breitbart continues to defend his own 'ends justify the means' bending of the truth."
SPJ official: Breitbart is "someone with a specific agenda." Andy Schotz, ethics committee chair at the Society of Professional Journalists, said: "Basic journalism calls for getting information, checking it out, looking for context and trying to get to the truth. ... Gathering snippets and putting them out there to see what happens seems to be what is happening here. (Breitbart) is also someone with a specific agenda."
















Then again, the place for Breitbart is obviously under the bus. Long may he remain there.
The sympathy for Sharrod is definitely warranted.
But were was this outpouring of support for the people who lost their jobs at ACORN?
Breitbart doctored those videos as well and people were hurt by him then as well ...
wont suffer any damage,nor will his credibility be affected, and he's had enough experience to know,scumbags of this caliber are excepted
in some circles
Not if you're Shirley Sherrod having her character defamed by Breitbart and Fox...
Sharrod suffered measurable damages (e.g. loss of a job, being publicly dragged thru the mud) via a statement someone else (Breitbart) doctored to make her appear to say something she did not.
That's textbook defamation.
Tolfe "Lee" Albert
Frankly, I'm starting to believe that many of the most prominent leaders in the radical conservative movement (Limbaugh, Ailes, Coulter, et.al.) don't actually hold the convictions they are purported to hold. They know that anger sells better than rational argument, and they spout their thinly-veiled racist and classist diatribes for the same reason Willie Sutton robbed banks--because that's where the money is.
Absolutely agree. They are phony to the core.
That's what I've been saying for a very long time. These people don't even believe the garbage they shovel . . . they know that the way to keep their followers coming back for more is to appeal to their baser emotions and fears. As long as they keep coming back, the "leaders" will line their own pockets.
There is nothing more distasteful than weak spineless unprincipled politicians who are so desperate to hold on to their base voters that they sell their values and beliefs to some loudmouth media personality who doesn't give a rip about them. Serves them right.
If you're wrong, and they do believe the tripe they spew, then they are sociopaths that care nothing for the effect they have on society.
I had a cottage industry going for the past couple of weeks here pointing out how the impetus for the stories that were coming from the right were clearly NOT due to actual political differences, but were intended solely to demean Obama.
Behold your liberal media...
-------------------------------------------------------
...four times is the charm, I guess!
Hmmmm.
Give 'em a week and they'll be plastering his lies all over, again.
Should I wait?
On the Hannity show last night, Ann Coulter said that Breitbart was set up. LMAO
Captures his good side.
Well, if he HAD a good side, that would be it.
I guess.
Nobody left of the American center matches Breitbart in terms of (a) partisan identification, (b) political extremism, (c) media coverage, (d) bankrupt ethics, and (e) range of influence. And he's not the only one (see: Limbaugh, Rush; Beck, Glenn; Hannity, Sean).
However, slamming Breitbart is just the first step. Most media, including the NY Times, CNN, MSNBC, etc. have all done things like Breitbart at one time or another. The next steps is some good old fashioned self evaluation.
The news organizations need to re-examine their own policies and procedures and, perhaps, publish a manifesto promising their readers/listeners that they won't print stories without adequately fact-checking.
This huge disaster for Breitbart could prove an opportunity for the main stream news media to have a fresh start.
Here's hoping....
Oh, wait. I get it. Breitbart's really a comedian.
The WH should have known when you combine Breithbart & Beck there's nothing good about it. The WH response was wrong. The WH immediately reacted without completely checking out Breithbart's allegations. So this story caused another 4 day sensation & the WH lost.
Hopefully this is a "teachable moment" for Obama. There is so much on this country's plate we can not afford to get caught up in this silliness.
John