The Shirley Sherrod debacle was bound to happen sooner or later. With the 24-hour media constantly buzzing and "senior analysts" of think tanks constantly tossing out inaccurate talking points to fit their positions rather than educating the public, someone was bound to get stung.
The only thing that kept this situation from becoming worse was Sherrod's will to stand up herself rather than crumble under the glare of negative media attention.
Now, despite the need to constantly harp on the White House and NAACP for the Sherrod debacle (and some of the harping is very legitimate), one cannot deny that the two entities got overcome by a coordinated right-wing swarm that made their heads spin before they even had time to assess the situation.
A timeline by the group Media Matters details how quickly the Sherrod story moved through right-wing circles. A brief excerpt is as follows:
Monday11:18 a.m.*: Breitbart posts Sherrod video, calls her "racist," claims "Context is everything."
Fox News amplifies Breitbart's deceptively edited video
12:13 p.m.: Hoft runs with Breitbart video.
12:55 p.m.: HotAir's Morrissey: "Breitbart hits NAACP with promised video of racism."
1:40 p.m. (approximately): Fox Nation accuses Sherrod of "discrimination caught on tape" before she resigned.
1:49 p.m.: Ace of Spades picks up Sherrod story, calls it an example of "your government, working for you."
3:31 p.m.: Elizabeth Scalia of the blog The Anchoress raises questions about the editing of Breitbart's video.
4:01 p.m. Ace of Spades reports that CBS' NYC affiliate picked up Sherrod story, declares, "Breitbart gets results."
4:28 p.m. (approximately): Sherrod story hits Drudge.
4:50 p.m.: Breitbart tweets to Media Matters: "Tomorrow's gonna be a long day."
7:51 p.m.*: Big Government links to a FoxNews.com article reporting that Sherrod had resigned and USDA repudiated her remarks.
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."
8:50 p.m.: O'Reilly airs Breitbart's Sherrod video
9:04 p.m.: "Fox News Alert": Hannity reports that Sherrod has resigned and discusses the incident with Gingrich.
Say what you will about the right-wing, they know how to coordinate. And I don't think a "we have to investigate this further" explanation would have stood up under the constant, coordinated buzzsaw of innuendo from talking heads and bloggers eager to take revenge for so-called left-wing abuses. This wasn't an attempt to get a story -- it was deliberate move to score points and the facts be damned.
And yet the rest of the media seems to be intentionally sidestepping any conversations about this interlocking of dubious bloggers and supposedly legitimate newsmen and women to the point of absurdity. Talking Points Memo had this to say today:
It's much easier to focus on Obama or Vilsack or 'what it says about race in America' or whatever other nonsense. Because most reporters are simply cowed by Fox and Breitbart and Beck and the rest of the organized forces of bamboozlement -- too afraid, too bewildered, too hapless to apply anything remotely approaching standards in analyzing the fourth estate of which they are the nominal custodians. So what we get is this 'see no evil, hear no evil, speak not at all' routine from reporters and journalists who should know better.
It shouldn't be a surprise. These same people who are sanctimoniously calling out the White House for falling for the conservative blog/Fox News coordinated blitz were some of the same ones who actually defended the so-called news organization last year when the White House took it to task.
Still, irregardless of the how this entire thing ends, progressives would be wise to not miss the forest for the trees.
The right-wing blitz consumed the White House and the NAACP with the skill of an army of fire ants consuming a grasshopper. And if those two entities fell so easily, imagine who else can be put in a harsh spotlight of lies and innuendo. Who else will fall under the right-wing buzzsaw before they have time to gather up a defense?
There is a small silver lining to the situation. My guess is that this incident will be Breitbart's signature moment, forever scarring his already highly questionable reputation. That link is severed.
But like some monster out of Greek mythology, the right-wing noise machine remains strong, because for every one Breitbart, there are probably two or three others willing to stoop even lower to take his place.
And how Fox News was involved in this "blitz" when they didn't report on the story until Sherrod had already resigned and it became an actual news story is beyond me.
by Jeremy Holden
A July 21 AP article reports that the right-wing media scandal that used truncated video to smear a USDA official as racist shows "the power of conservative media." The article notes that right-wing activist Andrew Breitbart "said he offered 'video evidence of racism coming from a federal appointee' " and that Fox News initially framed the story as "racism caught on tape," only to change their tune after seeing the entire video.
From the July 21 Associated Press article headlined, "Sherrod case shows power of conservative media":
Fox News Channel has been riding high in the ratings since Barack Obama became the nation's first black president a year and a half ago. Commentators Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly offer a favorite destination for many administration opponent..."
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201007220015
How many people do you really think heard of Ms Sherod and this tape BEFORE the USDA fired her? It wasn't until AFTER she was fired that this became a media firestorm. Had the USDA, WH, NAACP done the job of vetting the tape, they could have taken the higher ground and shot down the right wing media and made themselves look good.
Instead, they fired her for FEAR that she'd be on Glenn Beck (mistakenly) and ended up looking completely incompetant. Yes, the right wing media still looked bad, but many other outlets jumped on the bandwagan as well, so it became a media embarassment instead of focused on the right wing media.
No matter how much spin is placed on the facts now, nothing is going to put the genie back in the bottle.
Monday
11:18 a.m.*: Breitbart posts Sherrod video, calls her "racist," claims "Context is everything."
Fox News amplifies Breitbart's deceptively edited video
12:13 p.m.: Hoft runs with Breitbart video.
12:55 p.m.: HotAir's Morrissey: "Breitbart hits NAACP with promised video of racism."
1:40 p.m. (approximately): Fox Nation accuses Sherrod of "discrimination caught on tape" before she resigned.
Fox Nation only posted the video and stated that it was investigating it and was trying to contact the individuals involved for comment. They did not call for her resignation.
Now, you post these rightwing bloggers at the same time sourcing Left Wing media. If you are going to discount the far right, then it is a stretch to count the far left Media Matters as credible. Their chief goal is to discredit conservative news stories.
Am I defending Fox's screw up? No. I fell for the video myself, and have posted my apology to Ms Sherrod here on HP. But,I'm not the NAACP or the WH/USDA. I'm not Ms Sherrod's employer.
The only blame for the firing of Ms Sherrod sits at the feet of the USDA and or the WH. The rest was just media spin.
And you have not provided the exact time fox news posted the article on their website.
Oh, and I noticed one important item missing from your timeline: Obama administration asks Sherrod to pull over to the side of the road and resign. I know, at least for me, that informed my thought that the tape must have some legitimacy because otherwise why in the world would they ask her to resign? I assumed that surely they (and the NAACP) sought to put her comments into context before throwing her under the bus. So you choose - they are either incompetent or looking to leverage it for something else. You want a conspiracy? Look there.
Can you add when Sherrod resigned to your timeline please.
Irregardless is not a proper word.
the complete video of her speech as an option for his readers to look at but it appears
no one including our government bothered to watch it! LOL .. I guess people like to make decisions based on headlines and edited videos.
I do not what to limit that right but I would love to find some way to hold them accountable for spreading lies. Maybe we need to rework our liable laws?
Fox reports the same news that CNN does. The difference is the pundits on Fox lean to the right where the pundits at CNN/MSN and the rest lean to the left.
It cracks me up that you cant see this.
I agree.
Got it.
Interestingly, Fox viewership continues to grow and Fox dominates the market so someone is watching.
I'm ready to donate to her legal fund, and look forward to the beginning of depositions and discovery process.