Manufacturing racist charges to cover up racism

[headscratcher4]

What is completely dispirting is that the media doesn't even hold his feet to the fire over statements he was making less than 24 hours ago...they report the "It's really the NAACP" line as if there was no history here. We are reduced to a corporate public memory of seconds.

 

[Lurker]

What is completely dispirting is that the media doesn't even hold his feet to the fire over statements he was making less than 24 hours ago...they report the "It's really the NAACP" line as if there was no history here. We are reduced to a corporate public memory of seconds.

Apparently O'Reilly was mistaken at Breitbart's actual target:

O'REILLY: Wow. Well, that is simply unacceptable. And Ms. Sherrod must resign immediately. The federal government cannot have skin color any assistance. We are requesting an explanation from the agriculture secretary, Tom Vilsack, and will keep you posted.

 

[headscratcher4]

I'll bet Bore really feels stupid today. I expect him any minute to apologize to Ms. Sherrod and remind his viewers that the real target was the NAACP audience. Bill is so good at apologizing for being wrong.

Fortunately for Beck...the truth of the situation became so overwhelming that he didn't have to make a fool of himself (for a change) and than figure out how to spin it anew.

 

[MikeMangum]

Are you claiming that anyone who believes a lie bears the same culpability as the liar?

So Fox news is blameless then? They were not the originators of the story, after all, and did not have access to the full video, whereas the NAACP did. So according to what you just said, Fox news has less culpability than the NAACP does.

 

[The Charnel Expanse]

Conservatives and Republicans have much to be ashamed of in the realm of civil rights and race relations. Sadly, instead of owning up to their past misdeeds they've decided to adopt a policy of tokenism - trotting out non-white movement members and placing them in positions of prominence even if they're sleazy [Ken Blackwell], incompetent [Michael Steele, Alberto Gonzalez] or simply insane [Alan Keyes] which inevitably backfires. The other component is trying to smear Democrats in general and Liberals in particular as racist in one capacity or another, which also inevitably backfires.

You have to wonder if they'll learn their lesson first, or lose all meaningful support from minorities.

 

[Lurker]

So Fox news is blameless then? They were not the originators of the story, after all, and did not have access to the full video, whereas the NAACP did. So according to what you just said, Fox news has less culpability than the NAACP does.

No, the NAACP to which you refer to did not have access to the full video. The LOCAL GA NAACP had access to the full video, not the National NAACP - and the National NAACP is the one who responded to the tape.

As to FoxNews and blame, I would say two items:

1. FoxNews opinion shows were all over this story attacking Sherrod and the NAACP.
2. FoxNews.com similarly reported on the event

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Fox News is at it again, repeating ad nauseum manufactured fake news. This time they've taken a clip out of a speech given in front of the NAACP in the mid 80s by USDA Director of Rural Development, Shirley Sherrod.

First, they implied the event occurred recently after Shirley Sherrod was appointed by Tom Vilsack (Obama Admin) to her government position. It happened when she was a volunteer 20+ years ago, not when she had a government position where she could discriminate against white people.

No.

The speech was given March 27, 2010.

If you're going to start a thread, you should at least get the facts straight.

Since she's involved in the USDA, I wonder if she knows anything about sheep born with a human face?

I guess Fox didn't think anyone would actually check on the facts.

Oh the

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Hmm... well then I guess the lesson to be learned by the perpetrators is "Keep doing it".

Frank Luntz and Karl Rove who use this tactic politically on a regular basis have publicly acknowledged the benefits of these kinds of blatant falsehoods. As well the research shows that with time, many people will remember such things as the racism charge and not remember at all that the charge was false.

In this specific case, I believe the media focus on the mistake that was made firing Sherrod will have a more significant impression on people than an average news correction. It's going to be headlines for a day or more that Sherrod was railroaded.

But in the long run, people who falsely believe Obama is racist are going to have that belief reinforced regardless of the facts. And maybe that is really the reason here, not that a false story sticks even when revealed. But, rather, that people hear what they already believe regardless of what evidence is actually revealed.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The first thing that needs to happen is that the President and the Secretary of Agriculture need to apologize and re-instate the women whether she wants the job or not. It won't cure it, but when you make a mistake you should admit it, apologize and try to correct the mistake.

That's being done this morning.

The next thing that should happen is that the fired official should sue Beibart to become a persona non-grata for any credible news channel/organization. What he did is as bad, if not worse, than what got Dan Rather fired. But, I suspect nothing will happen...either from the Administration or from the news sources that perpetuated this outrage...I'm not holding my breath, but I'd like to be surprised.

Dan Rather was railroaded in a similar fashion. You can quibble about the fault behind the mistake that was made*, but the reaction to the error was the same kind of conscious manufactured outrage intended to deflect attention away from Bush's National Guard record and turn the story into one against the supposed liberal media.

The right wing is very skilled at this kind of propaganda. Luntz, Rove and the people they've influenced in the tactics know their stuff, and they use the scientific process to prefect it.

The left, in 2+ decades of being subjected to these kinds of successful campaign tactics have yet to figure it out. Obama did a much better job in his campaign responding to these tactics. But there were examples where he could have done better. In this case, I doubt Obama was involved in the decision to fire Sherrod given the rapidness of the firing.

Gibb's news conference just ended and he said Obama was informed but not consulted. So Obama could have said, wait a minute, and he didn't. OTOH, Obama would have been trusting Vilsack, not the Fox News story.

A second issue from the Gibb's news conference, however, is the gutless lack of going after the lying sacks of poo that manufactured this lie in the first place. Obama the peacemaker is not an effective means, IMO, of responding to this very skilled propaganda marketing.


*Beyond the similarities in manufacturing the news, the Rather topic belongs in another thread. So I ask folks to please not take this off topic by getting re-debating the Bush election. Keep it to the manufactured outrage news stories, thanks.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Speaking of the skill of the right wing propaganda machine, you can expect the conservative news media to now make the story about the Obama admin's incompetent rush to judgement and the conservative media will attempt to deflect attention from their purposeful propaganda effort, manufacturing the story initially.

Obama, via Gibb's failure to attack back against a purposeful media lie, paves the way for yet another successful twisting of the facts.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The Dan Rather analogy is apt. From what I can tell, Breitbart didn't verify the source and didn't have the entirety of the clip before posting it. He was all too willing to find something damaging against an idealogical opponent, much like Rather.

I imagine both he and Fox News will now shift the focus of the story to:
1) The Obama Administration's response
2) The reaction of the crowd as the victim accused was telling her story as a sign of institutionalized racism.

The question here becomes, did Breitbart know he was distorting the facts, or did her merely believe the clip someone else presented to him?

In the Rather case, it's hard to believe Rather knew the letter in question was fake. Some investigation into verifying the letter was made. (Again you can debate about the adequacy of the effort.) And other evidence supporting the charges against Bush that the letter was presented as supporting, were consistent with the letter.

In the Sherrod case, the full video was easily accessed. The news story left out the critical fact the video was from the 1980s when Sherrod had a volunteer job, not a government job. The evidence that Sherrod helped many poor white farmers was readily available. And there was no corroborating evidence Sherrod regularly discriminated against whites or was a racist.

These two stories are far from equal.

 

[Mumbles]

So Fox news is blameless then? They were not the originators of the story, after all, and did not have access to the full video, whereas the NAACP did. So according to what you just said, Fox news has less culpability than the NAACP does.

Fox News is a news channel. They're supposed to investigate and use what they find to help viewers understand the issues. Instead, they're grabbing edited videos off some buffoon's website and howling with anger.

 

[A'isha]

In the Sherrod case, the full video was easily accessed. The news story left out the critical fact the video was from the 1980s when Sherrod had a volunteer job, not a government job.

The incident Sherrod tells her anecdote about was from the 80's, but the video itself was from a speech given, I believe, just this past March.

The evidence that Sherrod helped many poor white farmers was readily available. And there was no corroborating evidence Sherrod regularly discriminated against whites or was a racist.

This, however, is true.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Unfortunately that seems to be the case. Until there is strong pushback on these sorts of things they will continue. I keep hoping for pushback but our media is pretty weakwilled.

I predict Breitbart will suffer no damage whatsoever. Already as I went to lunch today I listened to a snippet of Rush and he was blaming Vilsack for firing her without hearing her side. No mention of the conservative Breitbart.

So I've also correctly predicted the right wing media response distracting the audience from the real story.

Of course, it wasn't difficult to predict. Nor was it difficult to predict the gutless Gibbs reply to the incident.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The incident Sherrod tells her anecdote about was from the 80's, but the video itself was from a speech given, I believe, just this past March.....

Thanks for that correction. I see the speech was given at the "20th Annual Freedom Fund Banquet", March 27, 2010.

That would suggest Breitbart didn't dig as hard as it appeared to find fodder to attack back against the NAACP resolution against the Tea Party. I stand corrected on that point.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

What is completely dispirting is that the media doesn't even hold his feet to the fire over statements he was making less than 24 hours ago...they report the "It's really the NAACP" line as if there was no history here. We are reduced to a corporate public memory of seconds.

Kind of like one of the posts here.

Mind you, this is precisely what the NAACP was engaged in when they started the whole mess.

Edit: Correction, the manufacturing part, not the covering up part.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

In the Sherrod case, the full video was easily accessed. The news story left out the critical fact the video was from the 1980s when Sherrod had a volunteer job, not a government job.

Wow, still sticking to your story huh? The video is from March 27, 2010, and yet you continue to insist it is from the 1980's, all the while complaining about Fox News getting the facts wrong. That's got to be humiliating.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Thanks for that correction. I see the speech was given at the "20th Annual Freedom Fund Banquet", March 27, 2010.

That would suggest Breitbart didn't dig as hard as it appeared to find fodder to attack back against the NAACP resolution against the Tea Party. I stand corrected on that point.

Sounds like you didn't dig hard enough either.

 

[The Charnel Expanse]

The speech was given in 2010. The story refers to events that occurred in 1984.

 

[332nd]

Wow, still sticking to your story huh? The video is from March 27, 2010, and yet you continue to insist it is from the 1980's, all the while complaining about Fox News getting the facts wrong. That's got to be humiliating.

Psst.... she corrected herself.