AP - Ousted USDA employee Sherrod plans to sue blogger

[The Evil Genius]

Outstanding. I hope she ends his career.

I know it won't happen. But in a just world...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100729/ap_on_re_us/us_usda_racism_resignation;_ylt=AjF5irLy_loqYZIbQNCTWMms0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTN1NnM4cnZ1BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNzI5L3VzX3VzZGFfcmFjaXNtX3Jlc2lnbmF0aW9uBGNjb2RlA21vc3Rwb3B1bGFyBGNwb3MDNgRwb3MDMwRwdANob21lX2Nva2UEc2VjA3luX2hlYWRsaW5lX2xpc3QEc2xrA291c3RlZHVzZGFlbQ--

By JESSE WASHINGTON, AP National Writer Jesse Washington, Ap National Writer – 2 mins ago

SAN DIEGO – Ousted Agriculture Department employee Shirley Sherrod said Thursday she will sue a conservative blogger who posted a video edited in a way that made her appear racist.

Sherrod was forced to resign last week as director of rural development in Georgia after Andrew Breitbart posted the edited video online. In the full video, Sherrod, who is black, spoke to a local NAACP group about racial reconciliation and overcoming her initial reluctance to help a white farmer.

Speaking Thursday at the National Association of Black Journalists convention, Sherrod said she would definitely sue over the video that took her remarks out of context. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has since offered Sherrod a new job in the department. She has not decided whether to accept.

Sherrod said she had not received an apology from Breitbart and no longer wanted one. "He had to know that he was targeting me," she said.

Breitbart did not immediately respond to a call or e-mails seeking comment. He has said he posted the portion of the speech where she expresses reservations about helping the white farmer to prove that racism exists in the NAACP, which had just demanded that the tea party movement renounce any bigoted elements. Some members of the NAACP audience appeared to approve when Sherrod described her reluctance to help the farmer.

MORE AFTER LINK

[Hunter44]

Outstanding. I hope she ends his career.

I know it won't happen. But in a just world...

I totally agree. This guy is a dirt bag.

[Destino]

It's the only way a "alternative media" member will ever be held responsible for anything.

[jnhay]

That's stupid. Any semi-intelligent person wouldn't have fired her so quickly after seeing this video. Sue that dum dum.

[Landryslegend]

It's the only way a "alternative media" member will ever be held responsible for anything.

I absolutely agree. He should be punished, no room in journalism for this type of thing. In fact I would like to see Breitbart held to the very same standards that MSNBC was when they pulled off the SCAM about the dude with the rifle on his back. Oh wait.......

[Burgundy Burner]

It will be thrown out of court - as it should be. Breitbart was simply showing that the responses in the video were racist. He proved a point.

Of course, Breitbart could play the video of her husband at another meeting.

QrcJ3cBDS7Y

[December90]

Speaking Thursday at the National Association of Black Journalists

Would we give any credibility to the "National Association of White Journalists"?

If the answer is as expected "NO" then why do we legitimize a racist association that excludes people simply based on their race?

We are NOT "African-American" or "Anglo-American" or any other "hyphenated-American." We are simply American. Black, white, yellow, red or any other color of the rainbow, nobody is better than anyone else and nobody is less than anyone else simply because of the color of their skin. We need to stop telling people of any race that they are inferior and in need of special privilege so that they can pretend to be equal.

Stepping off the soapbox now

carry on...

[twa]

Glad to hear it...not that I think she has a case. If she feels wronged,why not?

Now suing her boss on the other hand

[Johnny Punani]

I didn't know blogging was a career.

[jnhay]

It will be thrown out of court - as it should be. Breitbart was simply showing that the responses in the video were racist. He proved a point.

Of course, Breitbart could play the video of her husband at another meeting.

At this point, I can't take any video that has blips (1:45) in it at face value.

[twa]

For those who are interested, here is Breitbarts original post:

http://biggovernment.com/abreitbart/2010/07/19/video-proof-the-naacp-awards-racism2010/

In this rather lengthy post, the only descriptive of Sherrod in the entire thing is:

"...this federally appointed executive bureaucrat lays out in stark detail, that her federal duties are managed through the prism of race and class distinctions.

This could be fun:silly:

[aREDSKIN]

Although IMO she was wronged when considering the entire context of her speech, however, this case gets nowhere. Freedom of the press is just that.

[Burgold]

Although IMO she was wronged when considering the entire context of her speech, however, this case gets nowhere. Freedom of the press is just that.

Freedom of Press does not include slander and libel. The question is whether Sherod counts as a public figure. Certainly, there was an effort made to manipulate the footage to damage her reputation and injure her. More, she was injured in a very public way.

It'll be a hard case, but like the cases against the National Enquirer over fraudulent reporting it can occassionally be won. In any case, I don't think any should be crying for Breitbart. He represents the worst in journalism. He is what the right has been fearing and crying against for decades. It would be horrible if they stood up behind him.

[TimmySmith]

She has no case.

[Thiebear]

She said in her own words she was a racist that had seen the light and repented.

How was he slandering her again?

Is she saying he left out the "repented" part? which would qualify as slander?

[Redskins Diehard]

Why wouldn't she sue her employer for firing her without cause?

[Bang]

Win or not, if it sheds light on the methods these "alternative media" types use to skirt the normal boundaries of ethics, then it will be for a good thing.

Frankly, i can't see how anyone can defend the doctoring of the video as anything even resembling what any one of us would consider "right" or "honest". If the same type of situation happened to any one of our mothers I'd bank my last buck that there would not be any defense of the insinuation and wink wink tactics employed to create a false perception. (A false perception that certainly fooled me at the outset.)

I guess the only way to defend it is to say that you believe that these types of shenanigans are good, at which point I'd have to disagree as vehemently as I ever have with any premise ever.

Demand better, or we're never going to get it.

~Bang

[Burgold]

Why wouldn't she sue her employer for firing her without cause?

Honestly, I expected her to sue both. She still may.

[TimmySmith]

Win or not, if it sheds light on the methods these "alternative media" types use to skirt the normal boundaries of ethics, then it will be for a good thing.

You guys act like news organizations have not been selectively quoting people since the beginning of reporting. Why won't many athletes talk to the press? Politicians are the victim of this sort of thing every time they open their mouths. I am not justifying it, I am just saying that this is hardly a landmark event. The rule of thumb is to take everything you see and read with a grain of salt. This lawsuit is as big a waste of time as the original story.

[Bang]

You guys act like news organizations have not been selectively quoting people since the beginning of reporting. Why won't many athletes talk to the press? Politicians are the victim of this sort of thing every time they open their mouths. I am not justifying it, I am just saying that this is hardly a landmark event. The rule of thumb is to take everything you see and read with a grain of salt. This lawsuit is as big a waste of time as the original story.

at this response.

So i'm not mis-interpreted again i'll spell it out as clear as I can.

I'm acting like I'm sick of being manipulated.

I don't pretend that this is something new. By your post, you'd seem to be implying that I am somehow naive to this stuff throughout the ages.

Now before you go assigning any other beliefs to my words beyond what i've actually written on the page, I'll say it quite clearly. I'm not naive to these practices. Not by any stretch.

I'm sick of it. So should you be. So should all of us be.

You can call it a waste of time, but to call the original story a waste of time is to ignore what happened as a result of it, and why the news media continues to "waste time" with such things. If you would like to see more such wastes of time, then by all means, don't support outing this stuff and trying to somehow curtail it. I wonder if you think that sticking your nose in the air will result in fewer such wastes of time?

The only reason they do it is because portions of our society encourage it, accept and allow it and enable it by either believing it, or upon recognizing that it's BS, not demanding it CEASE.

~Bang

[Thiebear]

I used to quote briebart... i used to read briebart.

That has stopped for good... Thats how you create real reporting.

[Bang]

I used to quote briebart... i used to read briebart.

That has stopped for good... Thats how you create real reporting.

Bingo.

And one way to help that happen on any scale that will make a difference is to drag the slimy ones out into the light.

~Bang

[aREDSKIN]

Freedom of Press does not include slander and libel. The question is whether Sherod counts as a public figure. Certainly, there was an effort made to manipulate the footage to damage her reputation and injure her. More, she was injured in a very public way.

.

We'll see. You'lll have to prove intent as to Sherod was the actual target. I agree she was injured. Defamation suite are notoriously difficult and expensive. Let her have her day in court if she wishes.

[Burgold]

We'll see. You'lll have to prove intent as to Sherod was the actual target. I agree she was injured. Defamation suite are nutritiously difficult and expensive. Let her have her day in court if she wishes.

Yeah, I don't think it is an easy case at all. I think she has standing to attempt one. I also think that she was wronged. Whether she was legally wronged in a way where she can be compensated for her injury is a different matter.

But her name, reputation and life have been dragged through the mud. She lost her job and became a figure of national ridicule all based on intentionally distorted material. The fact that Breitbart has admitted he doctored the tape to make a political point may help her cause. This wasn't someone trying to get the story right. This was someone trying to create a story.

[aREDSKIN]

This wasn't someone trying to get the story right. This one someone trying to create a story.

Journalism & news reporting has been rife with this mindset & MO for decades. It's nothing "new."