No way. Hillary Clinton gets whole credit for that one.
Posted by Insufficiently Sensitive at July 22, 2010 06:19 PMThe controversy illustrates the influence of right-wing Web sites like the one run by Andrew Breitbart, the blogger who initially posted the misleading and highly edited video, which he later said had been sent to him already edited. (Similarly, Mr. Breitbart used edited videos to go after Acorn, the community organizing group.) Politically charged stories often take root online before being shared with a much wider audience on Fox. The television coverage, in turn, puts pressure on other news media outlets to follow up
Fox News began its pursuit of Ms. Sherrod in prime time on Monday night on three successive opinion shows that reached at least three million people. Leading off, Mr. O'Reilly asked on his top-rated program, "Is there racism in the Department of Agriculture?" He discussed the tape, plugged Mr. Breitbart's Web site and demanded that Ms. Sherrod resign immediately.
By the time Mr. O'Reilly's remarks, which were taped in the afternoon, were broadcast, Ms. Sherrod had indeed resigned, a development that Fox's next host, Mr. Hannity, treated as breaking news at the beginning of his show. He played a short part of what he called the "shocking" video from Mr. Breitbart, and later discussed the development with a panel of guests, mentioning the N.A.A.C.P.'s recent accusations of racism within the conservative Tea Party movement.
"It is interesting they just lectured the Tea Party movement last week," Mr. Hannity said, telegraphing a talking point that would come up repeatedly on other shows.Posted by MikeBoyScout at July 22, 2010 07:34 PM
Oh yeah, and I've written a lot of news for online, too (completely separate from Sound Politics or my personal web site). And I've written a couple of books, too.
Not that I care what you think ... I just find it funny that, as usual, you have no idea what you're talking about.
So, if you are currently a local journalist, where can I sample some of your local journalism?
Posted by scottd at July 23, 2010 06:53 AMI couldn't care less about what you consider yourself. It has absolutely nothing to do with me, or what I said.
Perhaps you think that the implication was that I report on local affairs, but that is a matter of interpretation of what Jim said, and how I responded.
Maybe I should slow down for you next time.
No, pudge -- you're doing fine. And, as always, thanks for the laugh.
Looking forward to more of your "journalism."
Posted by scottd at July 23, 2010 07:53 AMI know. But YOU'RE not.
Pudge = 100
ScottD = 0
DemoKid = 0
MikeBoyScout = 0
Just like some of the people on this board.
I hope you don't mind, but I went back and re tallied the Score and came up with different totals. Here's the corrected version:
Pudge = 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
ScottD = :-p
DemoKid = :-o
MikeBoyScout = :-D
I think local Journalisters were playing Jedi mind tricks on you Tim.
You see pudge gets a bonus cuz he's "written a couple of books, too.". He would have received a double bonus if he had used 'also, too' there at the end like that other famous journalist who wrote a book instead of his form of redundancy using; "And" at the beginning and "too" at the end of his sentence.
We'll need to wait for the final score until all the other journalists who read (un)SP weigh in, I mean besides the award winning (Schrammie!) journalist, pudge, who just broke the story on "new math" applications for campaign finance reports.
Posted by MikeBoyScout at July 23, 2010 09:49 AMDUH.
If the "Journolist" was so fab, and there was nothing wrong with what it was doing, .....why has it been shut down?
Posted by attila at July 23, 2010 10:21 AMOther than in your mind, where is the "absolutely damning evidence that there was and is collusion to support and promote a particular agenda rather than report news" other than what I cited above @8 with Breitbart?
It is a fact that Breitbart's been twice caught editing footage to support and promote an agenda. Have you an example of footage being edited by a journalist and broadcast to support the ACORN or NAACP agenda?
Show us please.
You are simply projecting what Media Matters, the Daily KOS and other leftwingnut web sites do routinely. The ACORN tapes were part of a sting operation that the left can't stop whining about.
Posted by KDS at July 23, 2010 10:51 AMI'm not projecting anything. You live with your head in the sand afraid to know the truth.
Goebbels indeed.
State of California Department of Justice
"The evidence illustrates," Brown said, "that things are not always as partisan zealots portray them through highly selective editing of reality. Sometimes a fuller truth is found on the cutting room floor."
And we're still waiting for any evidence of journalists pushing ACORN or NAACP positions with selective editing.
Try again and this time - take your blinders off and do away with the guide dog. We will be shocked if you can...
Posted by KDS at July 23, 2010 11:19 AMNo, I don't remember.
I googled "MSNBC tea party rally guns" and got this:
Handguns, rifles at Constitution rally which shows white people with guns. So it is not as if MSNBC reporting white people with guns showed up at teabagger rallies did not happen, which is quite the opposite of the ACORN malarkey.
Yeah. It's almost like they're deliberately ignoring the original point. Wonder why that is?
Posted by jimg at July 23, 2010 11:36 AMThe left wing cabal to manage the news known as Journolist is apparently guilty if one of the cardinal sins of the left: lack of diversity.
Update from Thomas Lifson:
Thank Gaia! The color barrier at Journolist has been smashed by Ta-Nehisi Coates of The Atlantic, who admits his membership on Journalist today. ... However, the Journolist numbers still look rather racially exclusionary. One black out of 74 known members would never fly in a private company.
YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS STUFF UP.
Don't ya love the stench of imploding libo-hypocrisy in the summer?
Posted by RagnarDanneskold at July 23, 2010 11:43 AMhttp://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/07/shocking-video-what-the-msm-wont-show-you-from-shirley-sherrods-outrageous-speech/
The next link is a video portrait of leadership:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psJGHGeLSeE&feature=player_embedded
Enjoy.
Posted by Paddy at July 23, 2010 11:51 AMNo amount of facts will permit you to evaluate the situation, because you live in your own little world where scary brown people and liberals haunt your every move and threaten your existence.
Andrew Breitbart on February 20, 2010 at the Conservative Political Action Conference
"I want to start off with a... I have to apologize to the nation because, uh, the pimp in the pimp and prostitute video apparently wasn't dressed like a flamboyant pimp. I am so sorry this nation --- uh, for --- I don't know what to say."Posted by MikeBoyScout at July 23, 2010 11:53 AM
Here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYKQJ4-N7LI
It's really not that hard to understand.
Posted by Gary at July 23, 2010 11:59 AMIf the commies (aka "progressives") whooping it up on "Journolist" were doing nothing wrong where are the poor dears? Where is the web site??
Gosh, those gutless commies just had to retreat yet again. How sad.
What "point"?
Why hasn't Tucker Carlson or Jonathan Strong or any of the folks over at the Daily Caller released and published the content of the e-mails in their entirety?
Could it be the same reason that Breitbart pushes selectively edited tapes?
Seems if the Daily Caller would do that it would end all unreasonable liberal claims and give them their comeuppance, yet they don't. hmmmmm.
Just because you failed to find something does not mean it does not exist.
On Tuesday, MSNBC’s Contessa Brewer fretted over health care reform protesters legally carrying guns: "A man at a pro-health care reform rally...wore a semiautomatic assault rifle on his shoulder and a pistol on his hip....there are questions about whether this has racial overtones....white people showing up with guns." Brewer failed to mention the man she described was black.
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kyle-drennen/2009/08/18/msnbc-no-mention-black-gun-owner-among-racist-protesters#ixzz0uXKLNFkG
People actually defend this vile list...
Posted by Gary at July 23, 2010 12:10 PMYou are laughable and dark as usual as you keep grasping at straws -creative claptrap though. Mr. Breitbart is saying that he is sorry for political hacks with no moral compass like yourself, who will emulate Mr. Goebbels at the drop of a hat. He succeeded in making the Obama regime and NAACP behave stupidly, while employing Alinksy tactics that beat the leftists at their own game - sad commentary as to what media wars have degenerated to.
Facts are scary things to you and your ilk - I get that. Take off your blinders and do away with the guide dog and we'll have an honest discourse - fat chance...
Posted by KDS at July 23, 2010 12:11 PMHere's what reality based Americans are seeing: CNN Poll shows new Obama low on economy
Posted by You Lefties are so lost at July 23, 2010 12:12 PMWe do.
So it is not as if MSNBC reporting white people with guns showed up at teabagger rallies did not happen ...
They showed a particular black person with a gun and to illustrate "white people" were carrying guns. It was an obvious error; the only question is whether it was intentional (and with all the race-baiting done by liberals and journalists, such as on journolist where several of them admitted to lying about race, and encouraged others to do the same, it is not unreasonable to believe that intent to deceive is possible).
... which is quite the opposite of the ACORN malarkey.
This is the oddest myth. We know for a fact that in at least one incident at an ACORN office, employees tried to help what they thought was a pimp engage in trafficking of children for sex slavery. And somehow this becomes "malarkey." It's astonishingly vile to diminish what these evil ACORN employees did.
You know, just because Rachel Maddow says it was made up, doesn't mean it was. She is a liar. As her evidence that what happened in Baltimore was made up, Maddow cites a memo from the California Attorney General saying no crimes were committed. Except Jerry Brown's memo only covered the two incidents in California, and last I checked, Baltimore was a few thousand miles away from California. And whether or not they committed crimes is irrelevant to the evil they thought they were doing at the time.
Anyone who says the ACORN stuff is "made up" is a vile liar themselves, or ignorant of what actually happened. These ACORN employees -- who were fired by ACORN after the tape was released -- tried to do what they thought at the time was aiding and abetting child sex slavery. There's nothing made-up about it. Saying that the guy who made the video wasn't wearing a pimp outfit when the video was recorded is utterly meaningless to what these ACORN employees said on the tape. Similarly, the Bronx and DC tapes clearly show ACORN employees encouraging the "prostitute" to lie about her occupation on government forms.
Did everything in the ACORN videos happen (such as the woman saying she killed her husband), or did all the videos demonstrate wrongdoing (criminal or ethical)? Nope. But some of them did.
Fox News' numbers/market share keep going up as other (liberal) news source's numbers keep going down, losing market share. But why? Guys like Demo and the rest keep screaming how biased Fox News is, we've all heard the rag, but their viewer numbers keep climbing. What's going on here?
What is happening is that the louder the liberals scream the more people want to see what all the hubbub is about and tune in, fully expecting to see red-eyed and rabid conservatives preaching all manner of filth. Once they tune in they find that Fox is really pretty even handed on most stuff with a slight lean to the right . . . just like the population in the United States in general. At that point they stay, liking what they see (and up go the viewer numbers!). Unlike what they witness at other networks, they actually come away informed.
So, on behalf of Fox News, I'd like to thank Demo and other liberals for increasing the Fox audience share. It's word-of-mouth PR (the best kind) that Fox would have a hard time generating on their own without huge amounts of cash.
Thanks guys!
1. Let's skip the name calling. However good it may make you feel, it doesn't give anyone a rational reason to adopt your position.
2. Let's stay on topic. In particular, let's remember that this post has nothing to do with Shirley Sherrod and her hasty firing by the Obama administration.
3. I have sometimes put up open threads when I thought some of the readers really wanted to discuss a particular topic.
Once or twice, I have offered to put up a thread on request. No one, I repeat, no one, has ever taken me up on that offer. (I won't promise to do that often, because I have many other things, including writing posts for my own site, that I would rather do.)
Posted by Jim Miller at July 23, 2010 01:27 PMHa ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Tell me another good one. The lies about how Fox is "evenhanded" and how the people of the US have a "slight lean to the right" are rich.
Posted by demo kid at July 23, 2010 02:49 PMSo you guys have been howling about Fox News for years now and their audience share keeps going up while MSNBC, CNN and other liberal bastions are heading down. What do you think the reason is. People like liars? Justify it for me instead of calling bullsh*t on it. Why are their numbers going up? Because they are so bad? What?
Like it or not Demo you are in the minority and your incessant howling is fueling Fox's growth. that's all I'm sayin'.
Posted by G Jiggy at July 23, 2010 03:24 PMI think it needs no further comment.
Posted by Bill Cruchon at July 24, 2010 08:10 AMPosted by demo kid at July 23, 2010 02:49 PM
You accidentally spoke the truth. The preponderance of evidence shows this. Whatever you call a lie is the truth and your version of the truth is a lie. That belies any logic, but the rank and file lib progs have excreted logic out of your system in favor of toxic propaganda. Another Goebbels wannabe is deprogrammed.
Posted by KDS at July 24, 2010 12:45 PM"And it has held steady for many many years -- The percentage of Americans who call themselves conservative in these polls has never been less than 58% (conservative strength was that at its lowest point through these years in December 2007, when "only" 58% of Americans described themselves as conservative.) There has been a remarkable consistency in the responses to this question. Over the course of these polls, 60.2% of Americans, on average, call themselves conservative.
The results of the April 2010 Battleground Poll show that nothing has changed. Fifty-nine percent of Americans in the latest Battleground Poll call themselves conservative [snip] Remove the "Unsure/Refused," and sixty-two percent of Americans are conservative."
Posted by G Jiggy at July 25, 2010 02:21 PMAbsolute garbage. "Right-of-center"... on what scale? On what issue? Are you talking about gay rights? Abortion? Public funding of education? Gun rights? What's your scale?
Not to mention that the extreme political views presented by politicians in the U.S. tend to bracket the actual distribution of the American public. Running in the center -- whether center-left or center-right -- will always be better than running as a right-wingnut.
@62: You accidentally spoke the truth. The preponderance of evidence shows this. Whatever you call a lie is the truth and your version of the truth is a lie. That belies any logic, but the rank and file lib progs have excreted logic out of your system in favor of toxic propaganda. Another Goebbels wannabe is deprogrammed.
Wow... that was a whole load of random right-wing babbling all at once! Care to make a point?
@63: And it has held steady for many many years -- The percentage of Americans who call themselves conservative in these polls has never been less than 58% (conservative strength was that at its lowest point through these years in December 2007, when "only" 58% of Americans described themselves as conservative.) There has been a remarkable consistency in the responses to this question. Over the course of these polls, 60.2% of Americans, on average, call themselves conservative.
"Calling themselves conservative"? Please. Even I call myself "conservative" with respect to some issues. Stating that without breaking down what it means for individual issues is pretty damned pointless.
Posted by demo kid at July 26, 2010 05:25 PMHa, ha, ha!! You really made my day. That's funny!
Posted by G Jiggy at July 27, 2010 11:02 AM"His study [snip] analyzed whether people misperceive their relative ideological position by measuring on a scale from 1 to 10 what people think they are -- and measuring their opinion against a substantive issue ie how income should be divided.
That is, [snip] individuals are more likely to think that they are quite left-wing but actually believe things that compared to the rest of the population would make them comparatively right-wing."
So Demo, what you think is wrong. Taking this study into consideration, the percentage of the population as stated in my first post on this is actually probably higher than stated, not less.
Posted by G Jiggy at July 27, 2010 01:54 PMBut the 400-member listserv, like any community, was a complex arrangement comprised of many individual voices.
Now, Jim, what need does anyone have to "deny" or "confess" to being a member of a "complex arrangement comprised of many individual voices"? Isn't that what we citizens of a democracy are supposed to be?