Rebane's Ruminations
July 2010
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

George Rebane

ShirleySharrod The Shirley Sherrod saga has reached the silly season.  On RR, and probably many other blogs, the howls of how Fox News “snookered” the country and its government into an unjustified termination of the woman from her Dept of Ag job has reached hysteric heights.  The comment threads stand as a permanent witness.

The timeline of events turns out to tell another story, a timeline that by regulation the FCC requires broadcasters to maintain of content that they air.  Let’s take a look.

– On 27 March 2010 Ms Sherrod makes her famous NAACP speech and video.  NAACP has the full video of the speech.
– Early April internet commentator Breitbart gets a copy of the video, and sits on it.
– Week of 12 July 2010 the NAACP announces its draft resolution that alleges the Tea Party movement as containing racist elements and proceeding toward a racist organization.
– 19 July 2010 at 0818EDT Breitbart posts the now infamous video segment of Sherrod’s speech.  The WH finds out about it, briefs Obama who, as a minimum, does nothing to halt the intended firing of Sherrod because she will be “on Glenn Beck tonight.”
– By mid-afternoon on 19 July the Dept of Ag places three separate cell calls to Sherrod, in her car, demanding her resignation, and finally gets her to pull over and transmit her resignation on her Blackberry.  She has been fired.
– 19 July 2010 5-6pm the Glenn Beck show airs on Fox with no mention of Sherrod or the incident.
– 19 July 2010 in the evening after Glenn Beck’s show, commentators O’Reilly, Hannity, van Sustern all cover the firing (announced on an Atlanta station, CNN?) and the Breitbart segment.
– 19 July 2010 about 2100, Fox News interrupts Hannity to confirm the firing of Shirley Sherrod.
– 19 July 2010 2355 (almost midnight) the NAACP “cheers” the WH firing of Sherrod and fully backs the decision.

Quite a day.  And, of course, the leftwing media and blogs started screaming for the heads of Breitbart and Fox News way before the sun set that night.  The comment threads from the left across the country have ranged from the thoughtful to the vile, but have uniformly condemned both Breitbart and Fox News for journalistic malfeasance.

There apparently is much confusion in the liberal ranks about the difference between commentary and objective news reporting.  Commentators of all political hues picked up on the Breitbart posting during the afternoon of 19 July.  The WH, which doesn’t consider Fox News to be a real news source and has given its imprimatur to the ‘Faux News’ label that is used today by most collectivist outlets, apparently gave the highest credence to every blogger it encountered that afternoon and hip drew the decision to get Sherrod out before the evening news cycle.

The above timeline is a matter of record that can be reconstructed at will from the FCC archive.  What should be especially interesting is to review the original Breitbart video post, and then make a straight-faced case that that segment was sufficient for any kind of precipitous action, let alone a very public dismissal, by national institutions supposedly run under adult supervision.

[23jul2010 update] In a discussion with KVMR News Director Paul Emery today, he told me there was evidence that Fox News wrongly attacked Ms Sherrod on the air before she was fired.  The evidence he emailed me is on this MSNBC program.  The indictement starts with a Fox News clip which begins with the newscaster saying, “Breaking news tonight … “, indicating clearly that it was broadcast after the afternoon firing of Ms Sherrod.  The rest of the MSNBC program presents numerous other Fox News clips with anchor Rachel Maddow tying it all together in a sequence that somehow omits the needed timeline to nail Fox News.  In fact, all the clips shown seem to be of the post-firing evening programs.  In trying to get to the bottom of who did what when, does someone have any time related material of what Fox News broadcast before the afternoon firing?  If Fox News screwed up and then covered up, I want to post it.

But true to form, Ms Maddow, a handsome looking woman with a mouth like a razor, comes across convincing her viewers that Fox News fired Ms Sherrod.  Maddow is good, I almost believed her myself until it suddenly occurred to me that there was something in the middle called the United States Government and the Obama Administration that may also have had a hand in it.  Instead, Maddow makes out that the government was a sock puppet in which Fox News had its hand.

Posted in , ,

31 responses to “Fox News, Oh My!! (updated 23jul2010)”

  1. Barry Pruett Avatar

    Thanks for pointing out the timing of the reports. Once again the liberal playbook…when you don’t like the message, attack the messenger…even if the messenger was not really the messenger.

    Like

  2. Todd Juvinall Avatar

    FOX is always under attack by the left. Roger Ailes always outsmarts them.

    Like

  3. Mikey McD Avatar
    Mikey McD

    Hilarious! “and then make a straight-faced case that that segment was sufficient for any kind of precipitous action, let alone a very public dismissal, by national institutions supposedly run under adult supervision.”

    Like

  4. Paul Emery Avatar
    Paul Emery

    George
    There is no doubt that Bill O’Rielly said “Ms Sherrod must resign immediately” before she was fired. Why would he have said hat if she had already been canned? Also Fox Nation headlining “Caught on Tape-Obama official discriminates against white farmer” all done without fact checking or questioning the source. I can go on and on.
    Running a story that is based on faulty sources that calls for someone’s resignation is about as slanderous as you can get. Her lawyers are licking their chops on this one.

    Like

  5. Paul Emery Avatar
    Paul Emery

    Here is a link to the original posting that started the whole deal This is what inspired Fox to make it a big deal. Why they would choose to amplify a story from such a scummy source? Disgusting
    http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/07/20/naacp-statement-on-resignation-of-shirley-sherrod/
    Here is part of the original posting.
    “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.”

    Like

  6. George Rebane Avatar
    George Rebane

    OK Paul, now I’m really confused. Your link is to Breitbart’s original piece which has never been in contention.
    What puzzles me is that your citing of O’Reilly, whose program comes on after Sheppard Smith’s News which ends at 7pm EDT. That O’Reilly covered the Sherrod firing on his evening program is also not in contention.
    You seem to imply that O’Reilly came on Fox News sometime between 8:18am and 3pm EDT about which time Sherrod pulled over to the side of the road and resigned. I am not aware of a special appearance by O’Reilly during the day. Is that what your information tells us?

    Like

  7. Paul Emery Avatar
    Paul Emery

    George
    Check out the video again where he says that- a little more than a minute in. Why would he use that language if she she had quit already. Also the website. There’s no question about that. Perhaps his program was taped earlier but there’s no doubt it ran. Breibart will never again have any credibility. In the past he’s been a frequent TPP keynote speaker at major events. We’ll see where he lands

    Like

  8. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    O’Reilly is not Fox news – he is stating his opinion. Sherrod was fired by her boss. That would be the person to sue. The comical thing about this continuing mess is the running theme that Fox is actually controlling the American govt. That is, of course when the evil ghost of Bush isn’t making B.O. bend to his will. Now I hear that Sherrod has stated that Breitbart should be shut down. But that could just be the edited version and later she added – “and be given a powerful post in the federal govt.” The actual story is that the settlement for the black farmers has mushroomed and is threatening to become a back-door reparations scam for anyone who can game the system.

    Like

  9. Paul Emery Avatar
    Paul Emery

    Scott
    So then I can surmise that when O’reilly speaks of Fox News being “fair and balanced” he’s not referring to his program. How about the Fox Nation website (“Caught on Tape-Obama official discriminates against white farmer”. Is that commentary as well ?
    I tend to agree with you that her firing was a pathetic response to a rather amateurish propaganda scam that was amplified by Fox news and others including the NAACP.

    Like

  10. George Rebane Avatar
    George Rebane

    Just finished reading Peggy Noonan on the Sherrod fiasco in the WSJ this morning. While she doesn’t provide more detailed data, she does accuse the conservative media (presumably including all the Fox outlets, including their website) of “trumpeting” the partial clip and contributing to the panic to act presumptively. While I don’t know what she knows, I have come to respect her assessments, especially in today’s report given that WSJ and Fox are both owned by Murdoch.
    Given what I know today, IF Breitbart had the entire video, THEN his abbreviated post was scurrilous. Still don’t know the content and timing of how Fox Nation (website) picked up on Breitbart. Still no evidence that Fox News aired anything before the firing.
    Re O’Reilly – definitely is a commentator and not a newscaster, and he has made that clear to his audience numerous times. (I don’t like to watch him because of his hubris and impolite way he treats his guests.) While I believe that Fox News is more ‘fair and balanced’ than the liberal outlets, that judgement call is clearly painted (or tainted) by my worldview and ideology. Recall, that I am a practicing ideologue in the sense that I have explained before. http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2010/01/i-am-not-an-ideologue.html

    Like

  11. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    Paul, you are correct. When O’Reilly speaks of Fox news, he is not referring to his own show. Trying to blame him or any one else at Fox for the way that Sherrod was fired is just another example of folks that voted for B.O. trying to ignore the many failings of his administration. Her boss will, of course, be a good soldier and make sure that he lets everyone know that he alone is to blame. Although, at his press conference, he tried to whine on and on that he was just soooo over loaded with the task of handing out money to black farmers that he should be excused for the fact that he, like B.O., doesn’t have to have all the facts before he acts. The Breitbart question of how much video he had and how much he edited has not been settled. Until then, doesn’t he get the same ability to present his side as Ms Sherrod should have been given?

    Like

  12. Paul Emery Avatar
    Paul Emery

    It’s not really that important whether Breitbart had the full video in that he is a propagandist that was searching for information to prove a point that the NAACP has racist tendencies. That process is not surprising-stretching to prove a point. It happens all the time and is certainly note the sole privilege of the shrill right. But even if he didn’t have the full tape, which I doubt, he used the obviously partial video to make an assumption “Sherrod’s racist tale is received by the NAACP audience with nodding approval and murmurs of recognition and agreement.”
    This is obvious slander and was trumpted as the truth when FOX Nation headlined with “Caught on Tape-Obama official discriminates against white farmer”
    This is not news. This is pure propoganda

    Like

  13. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    Sorry Paul – you are now the one acting without full information. If Breitbart had only the video he showed then it’s not slander. You do not know his intent. You don’t know whether he went with a trusted source, you don’t even know if he was set up. It happened to Drudge and he found out the truth and apologised. It could be Breitbart did portray her dishonestly, but until you have the facts, you are now doing what you accuse Breitbart of doing. And it now does look like she did say that Breitbart should be “shut down”. If so, then she has lowered herself below anyone involved in this whole mess.

    Like

  14. Paul Emery Avatar
    Paul Emery

    George
    You have completely changed the topic. What does a discussion of government involvement in news have to do with this? I was discussing the ethics of an alleged legitimate news source (FOX} taking the postings of a blogger and reporting as if the assumptions of the blogger were truth without examining the sources. Why no response about the Fox Nation headline? If Brietbart was at all a legitimate transmiter of news he could have contacted her or the NAACP or his source and asked the simple question “Is this an edited version of the speech and can I see the entire video” before he jumped to this conclusion – “this federally appointed executive bureaucrat lays out in stark detail, that her federal duties are managed through the prism of race and class distinctions. ”
    A look at the entire video tells a different story. Fox apparently trusted Brietbart as a reliable source and didn’t bother to check it out any further before publishing the headline.
    Was he set up? Now we’re getting into real spy versus spy stuff. If he was it must have been with the expectation that he would publish it and ask no questions, which in fact he did.

    Like

  15. George Rebane Avatar
    George Rebane

    Paul, no intent to change the topic. I thought that we had come to an understanding on the data needed to resolve when Fox Nation and Fox News first reported the story. I have given you my best data on Fox News, and said I know nothing of when/what Fox Nation introduced (For all I know, they reported that Breitbart had posted a video clip that by and of itself was damning. That’s different than reporting that Sherrod was a racial bigot). Your argument that they did needs a bit more back-up before this dialogue can progress.
    Government moves to control web and aired content is now IMHO a much bigger story that is related to Sherrod but being blanked out by it.
    Breitbart, could have done a lot of things to confirm the extent of the tape. I agreed that given that he didn’t, he is guilty of retributive propagandizing against the NAACP.
    I hope your slant on this is not that incidents like the airing of Sherrod’s abbreviated video is an invention, preponderance, and/or habitual use of only conservative commentators.

    Like

  16. Paul Emery Avatar
    Paul Emery

    George
    Of course not. It’s used by propagandists of all persuasions. This was fairly mild and nipped at the bud. At it’s worst level, propaganda can be used to get us into war examples being the Democrats (Johnson) pushing the Tonkin Gulf (second incident) lie and the Republicans (Bush) with the so called “weapons of mass destruction”
    By the way,I believe the NAACP was off base when they accused the TPP of racism. Of course there are the fringes that get a lot of publicity as they do in any movement but I don’t believe that represents the direction of the movement.
    I’ll look into the Fox Nation Headline a little more.

    Like

  17. Paul Emery Avatar
    Paul Emery

    George
    Here you go with a timeline. Interesting that this has disappeared from the Fox archives
    http://mediamatters.org/research/201007220004

    Like

  18. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    Paul, the only thing that is really bad here is a woman was fired by an incompetent boss/bosses at some level (at what level, we will never know) fairly high up in the Obama administration. All they had to do was talk to her and hear her side of things. That they did not and fired her in such haste points to a great level of political fear in the normally cool and calm Obama admin. These folks run on our dime and are accountable to us. She now has compounded the problem by being an ex (and maybe back in govt service) official calling for “shutting down” a private blog. I’m getting pretty sick of hearing about free speech of the political sort being silenced all around the world and even here. Breitbart is running on his own money, not mine. I don’t have to listen to him and he has no power over me. If there is slander, then we have courts to handle that. Obama himself loves to slander and debase anyone who would criticise him with out naming them, of course. If you have proof that Breitbart, O’Reilly, Fox News, et al have run with this without any fact checking, then present your proof. I would really want to know. As far as being set up, it has happened – to Drudge and others. I have heard reporters and columnists say that it is some thing they have to worry about on a constant basis. I’m not trying to defend Breitbart personally, he is not altogether a very nice person from what I can see. Fox news is head and shoulders above the rest of the MSM in reporting ALL news stories, but they are not my only source nor should they be. They can also make mistakes, but is that their intent and how often do they goof? As far as the Obama admin. playing racial favorites – we already know that to be a fact, as testified to by folks who are in a position to know and by the admin.s actions. The video of Ms Sherrod was edited by some one to paint a false picture of her, but the fact still remains that the number of black farmers that were in the original lawsuit that had legal standing to a settlement has now exploded to include any black person who is willing to fill out some paper work. The people in charge should allow some outside neutral accounting of what is going on to ensure the money goes only to those who should be made whole from the govt.s past bias. We see now that the govt.s give aways and power plays have squandered huge sums of money and ruined thousands of hard working Americans.

    Like

  19. George Rebane Avatar
    George Rebane

    That’s an interesting timeline Paul. It confirms that Fox News and FoxNews.com did not report on Sherrod until in the evening after she had resigned. And FoxNation.com apparently reported at approx 1:40 that Breitbart had posted the abbreviated clips and his appended headlines. Oddly, that timeline totally omits any involvement of the NAACP that day, especially its major 11:55pm announcement condemning Sherrod. Go figger.
    Looking at the Hannity interview of Breitbart, we hear that Breitbart never had the entire exculpatory video of Sherrod. And he did not do the editing of what was submitted to him. See this
    http://www.thefoxnation.com/andrew-breitbart/2010/07/21/breitbart-reveals-story-behind-sherrod-tape
    I do believe that this story is blinding us to more serious matters going on including those pointed out by ScottO.

    Like

  20. Dixon Cruickshank Avatar
    Dixon Cruickshank

    Since this was a NAACP function shouldn’t they have had the full tape??? wouldn’t it be logical to expect them to bring up the fact that it was not complete?? they certainly were in the best position to clarify
    I would the real fault lies there

    Like

  21. Paul Emery Avatar
    Paul Emery

    Dixon
    I agree. They could have cleared up the mess at the start and exposed Brietbart for what he is.

    Like

  22. Mikey McD Avatar

    My understanding was that Brietbart was ‘saving’ this tape simply to show how racist the NAACP is (an arrow in his quiver so to speak)… the tape is far more damning of the NAACP audience than it is of the speaker.

    Like

  23. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    So, Paul, why didn’t the NAACP “clear up” the misinformation? I notice you seem to be giving the Obama admin a total pass on incompetance and still want to hate on Breitbart. Where is the proof of what you have on Breitbart? Again, I’m not clearing Breitbart, but the crime against Sherrod is with her superiors. Breitbart didn’t fire her. Lots of people report lots of things. It’s complicated, but one has to take responsibility of one’s actions and not blame one source of info. Does Breitbart complicate your life with “inconvenient truths”? What’s your real problem here?

    Like

  24. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    The facts are the facts. Obama fired the woman before FOX did a story. Breitbart had the short tape and the NAACP Georgis had the long tape. Therefore, FOX is exonerated and the rest a bums.

    Like

  25. Paul Emery Avatar
    Paul Emery

    Scott
    I did not give the Obama admin a pass. I posted this earlier on this thread in response to your comments “I tend to agree with you that her firing was a pathetic response to a rather amateurish propaganda scam that was amplified by Fox news and others including the NAACP.”
    Proof on Breitbart? What do you need? I’m not going through that again.
    By the way, he’s ben rewarded by the RNC with an invite to a big time Republican event. Chack it out. He shares the opening night with Michael Steele
    http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/documents/2010/07/republican-national-committee-event-featuring-andrew-breitbart.php?page=1
    Todd, as someone who has had trouble with the truthfulness of the press before you must be sympathetic to the situation.

    Like

  26. Scott Obermuller Avatar

    Paul, we’re going to have to disagree. I think you are still giving the Obama admin. a pass with a very mild rebuke, while painting them as victims. They are the perps. No one MADE them do anything. You contend that either Breitbart edited the video or knew that it had been shortened to slander Ms Sherrod. Saying you don’t like him and raising questions are not proof of either scenario. I’m going to wait and see if we ever find out who provided the video and what their intentions were. I’m certainly not holding my breath.

    Like

  27. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    Breitbart is a true American Patriot and I will not condemn him. If he made a mistake then as the liberals like to say, apologies and mea culpa’s will suffice. Jesse Jackson, now there is a true crumb-bum. But Breitbart publishes things the mainstream media are to PC to publish and that is good for America.

    Like

  28. RL Crabb Avatar

    Breitbart has taken a page from the Michael Moore playbook. Funny how Moore gets slammed by the right and Breitbart gets a speaking gig with the Repubs. So much for the face of objective journalism in the 21st century. Two sides of the same bad penny.
    Irony of the week: Blacks cheered when Obama was elected, thinking they finally had one of their own to level the playing field. Instead, they got an administration that bends over backwards to not appear biased toward people of color. The Sherrod incident being the latest example.

    Like

  29. Paul Emery Avatar
    Paul Emery

    Todd
    There you go again. Using you’re own words to me that “If you believe it then as a journalist I would expect you to get at least three indie confirmations.” shouldn’t you apply those standards to Breitbart as well? There are all kinds of self proclaimed Patriots. Timothy McVeigh considered himself a patriot. So was Jack Ruby.
    Scott, I think you’re right, I was way light on the Obama administration. Their reaction reminded me of when Michael Spinks fought Mike Tyson. He took one look at what was coming and hit the deck after one punch. Pathetic is a pretty mild description, incompetence is closer. All they had to do was the same thing the Breitbart should have done. Check the sources before arriving at any conclusions.
    Brietbart’s own words ” Sherrod describes how she racially discriminates against a white farmer. .” is a conclusion that would have been shown not to be true if Brietbart had followed Todd’s guidelines for ethical journalism and found three indie confirmations.
    Bob-good comparison with Michael Moore. They should are not journalists but instead are propagandists and entertainers. Confirmations, that’s an inconvenience when what you are trying to do is pass on a predetermined message. That’s what propaganda is.

    Like

Leave a comment