This from Dan Reihl ~~note one of the comments following: Breitbart: Why No Politico, Or Bloomberg Firings?
Andrew Breitbart makes a valid point in his brief interview with Matt Lewis of Politics Daily. More at link. Journalists are supposed to abide by a set of ethics that should have prevented some of the collusion that went on on JournoList.
Did any of them speak up about it on the list? Many of the most active members were WaPo employees. Did it not shock some journalists that such an established paper had employees engaging in that type of media malpractice?
If not, why? And, if so, what, if anything, did they do about it? Cue crickets chirping.
Q: How does the Shirley Sherrod story relate to the JournoList story where liberal journalist Spencer Ackerman suggested deflecting attention from the Reverend Wright story, which was hurting Obama, by wrongly accusing a prominent conservative of being a racist?
A: That collusion to slander by Ackerman -- and the sin of omission of the other 400 people on the list -- to abide by that calculated evil -- shows that we have a tremendous problem in journalism today -- and then they come and ask me about my tactics. I'm trying to end JournoList collusion that goes well beyond the (listserve's founder) Washington Post's Ezra Klein's 400 friends and collaborators, and that includes Politico and Bloomberg. Where are they firing people? Where are the questions about this monumental act of journalistic fraud? Where are the mass firings?
Q: Do you feel like you made a mistake by rushing to get the Shirley Sherrod video out too soon, though?
A: It had to be done at the exact moment in time that the press would notice it ... I grant her that she had her redemptive transformation. I said that her humanity caused her to help the farmer, and that it's not just about race. Notice how the press conspicuously ignores that. It's in the video and it's in the text [of Breitbart's original post on the topic]. Who is doing the selective editing here? This is about destroying me. This is about the NAACP, but they've made it about me versus her. This is about exposing the Democratic Party and the progressive strategy of framing opposition to the Democratic Party agenda as racist.
Dan on Saturday, July 24, 2010 at 02:22 PM in Media Bias, Politics | Permalink
THEN THIS COMMENT was pretty good too…..
Alinsky must be rolling in his grave. The way Breitbart has almost single-handedly transformed conservatism on the internet from isolated successes like Rathergate to a 24/7 liberal dirty laundry media campaign. He's done it by following Alinsky's rules. The way he's responded to this, not backing down, getting as much attention as possible, applying the enemy's rules to himself, etc., all Alinsky. That's the real reason the Left hates him. Tucker Carlson is now getting in on it too. Breitbart is still the trailblazer. He's a major threat to the Left's power in the information and narrative war.
Posted by: Lucchesi | Saturday, July 24, 2010 at 05:41 PM
riehlworldview.com |
