Thursday, July 22, 2010

Serious questions remain…

Okay, I’m not done chewing the Shirley Sherrod bone, ‘cause serious questions remain.

Why the fuck aren’t reporters asking some serious questions of the blogger who got all this shit stirred up?

ABC News has a piece online about how Andrew Breitbart got his start…but I couldn’t care less about that shit.

Has he corrected his story?

Will this pile of absolute bullshit push the mainstream media to revisit some of his other work…will it result in folks not buying what he’s selling anymore?

As a blogger, this is a big fucking deal.

I’ve gotten shit wrong before…it sucks but it happens and when it does happen bloggers need to correct that shit.

But it doesn’t look like Breitbart simply got the story wrong.

It looks like he crafted this non-story story based on bullshit from jump.

Sooooooo…

….what the fuck?

In a world where a reporter can be fired after private emails are released…where comments on YouTube can end a career…hell, in a world where Shirley Sherrod is kicked to the curb faster than I can type “bullshit”…in that world Breitbart should be eaten alive for this story.

I’m not saying that we should ignore the role the Obama administration may or may not have played in this shit….

And I sure as shit am not saying that we shouldn’t examine and critique the knee jerk tossing of Sherrod under the bus by the NAACP…

But this story came from Andrew Breitbart…and this bitch thinks the same journalists who failed in their investigative duty by embracing this shit at face value need to get back to basics and apply some motherfucking due diligence to the How The Fuck Did This Story Happen? angle.

Go out and get your journalist on and follow the money.

Shit, this isn’t even that complicated – just follow the fucking stank.

Blink.

9 comments:

libhom said...

That schmuck already had ran deceptive videos about ACORN. That organization was fully exonerated. Why are "news outlets" treating a blogger with such a terrible record as a credible news source.

Few instances illustrate the rightist and racist bias of the corporate media than this one.

A.Smith said...

You know, it's amazing...

The USDA (and, until I'm satisfied they didn't -- which I won't be -- the WH too) jumped to fire Shirley Sherrod to avoid getting reamed by FoxNews.

Now that the truth has come out, THEY'RE STILL GETTING REAMED.

FoxNews has come out relatively unscathed.

Ms. Sherrod couldn't even remember Breitbart's NAME (I fault her not -- but it shows how little he's talked about).

This experience should show the administration in about 50-11 ways why they need to ignore the ish out of stuff like this until they've checked all the facts. Chief among these examples is how even when it was Andrew Breitbart who YET AGAIN fabricated evidence and FoxNews who YET AGAIN ran with it, the people taking all the heat are in the administration. These guys win STILL!

Breitbart will never be called to task (I understand he wrote up some type of correction) and he will set his sights on another place of attack because his work on this piece is done.

NancyP said...

A legitimate story about Breitbart's deceptive editing, and Fox network's propagation of stories they know are flawed or outright lies, would be an excellent news story.

No mainstream news organisation would be allowed to touch it.

It seems that the reporter must be young and black to get the news analysis which always concludes - nothing to see here, folks, the editors and the news organisation bear no responsibility for fraud and fuck-ups, only the fiendishly clever lyin' scumbag of a reporter. NYT, are your financial officers' and editors' ears burning yet?

The mainstream news industry does not want to show HOW stories are put together, WHO chooses which stories get aired, WHAT type and HOW MANY sources they use before releasing a story, and WHETHER the news organisation has financial conflict of interest in presenting a story.

NancyP said...

Sherrod has cause for civil lawsuit, I would think. If Breitbart and Fox had the unedited tape and edited it to give the impression that she said the opposite of what a "reasonable listener" would conclude from the full tape, that might constitute slander. She wasn't a public person (politician, celebrity), her speech was several months ago and thus not obvious "news", and the timing of the story is clearly linked to the (partisan, but true) statement that the Tea Party's membership / affiliates include a large number of blatant racists. Finally, she has suffered real financial harm.

If I were her, and some lawyer could be persuaded, I might pursue a slander lawsuit against Fox and Breitbart, if only to get the full transcript in the public record (validated), and a wrongful firing lawsuit against USDA. Surely the powers that be did not follow S.O.P. for firing her, and to all appearances fired her for activity outside work, not constituting political lobbying (for a candidate or party).

Southland Diva said...

Thank You!

Why are reports acting like Brietbart faultless in all this? This dude manufactured this 'ish' and the MSM is so busy slamming the administration that they haven't even bothered to turn the investigative ardor on Brietbart! I don't care if he isn't a reporter! But then apparently, neither are the people who get paid to report the news....correction.... to report stuff.

Peace

Monica Roberts said...

Because of Breitbart's conservaskintone...

Let this had been a liberal African-American blogger getting it this wrong and the Right Wing Noise Machine would be at full roar.

xzxt1q said...

I agree!

BlackTsunami said...

The mere fact that news organizations seem to be treating Breitbart with respect gives a window into why the Obama Administration unfortunately caved.

The Irate Wiccan Faggot said...

http://iratewiccanfaggot.blogspot.com/2010/07/racist-fox-un-news-and-apology.html