 | Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years. Thanks, CNET Support |
General discussion
Sherrod v. Breitbart
Shirley Sherrod says she plans to sue conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart, the Associated Press reports from San Diego: "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":
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.
Does she have a winning case? Probably not.
Ha! Good luck with that one. Ever heard of the First Amendment?
Discussion is locked
31 - 60 of 104 Posts
- Collapse
- Collapse -
from some of the posts here that some people don't really know what Breitbart actually said about Shirley Sherrod or what his piece was about. So, here it is:
http://biggovernment.com/abreitbart/2010/07/19/video-proof-the-naacp-awards-racism2010/
Note:: I have not edited it or modified it in any way.
- Collapse -
I've noticed stories change and not always with an "updated on..." to reveal that, I've taken to doing screen captures of something I considered of interest, to me. Even when I pay a bill online, I do screen capture of the confirmation page, just in case.
- Collapse -
Timeline
http://mediamatters.org/research/201007220004
Breitbart's page at biggovernment as appears currently.
http://biggovernment.com/abreitbart/2010/07/19/video-proof-the-naacp-awards-racism2010/
- Collapse -
Let's keep in mind that Breitbart didn't fire her.
- Collapse -
I am speaking to Breitbart and his actions... how does raising the fact that Breitbart did not fire Sherrod have anything to do with what I am speaking to?
- Collapse -
And her suing Breitbart is just part of the subject. If she wants to sue someone who did more damage to her, it would be certain govt officials.
- Collapse -
who could have provided the full story but chose not to.
Hmmmm.. wonder why.
- Collapse -
So Breitbart has a fairly popular, and some say credible, web site... where he uses whatever video clips he can get his hands on, as long as they support his position.
Boy... doing that could come back and bite him on the but someday. 
- Collapse -
... there was no disclaimer that disassociated Sherrod from the USDA.
Yet the article starts out with these exact words...
racism coming from a federal appointee
The fact that he is back peddling from the very first misleading connection in his article is editing enough, don't you think?
- Collapse -
So that much was true. What part did you object to or find untrue?
- Collapse -
do NOT constitute "changes" as per the original charges. Oooo.. he fixed a typo!
Busted!
- Collapse -
it was substantially more than fixing a typo, no matter how much you want to downplay it... or was his original comment that context is everything not that important after all ?
- Collapse -
I'd be interested to see how you are reading my posts.
- Collapse -
...I even understand some of your posts, especially when they seem to leave the subject matter, or make oblique references that are left undefined. How could I possibly know what part you objected to? I'm not a mind reader.
- Collapse -
when originally the charge was that Breitbart had edited the VIDEO.
Look! A flying squirrel!
- Collapse -
The First Amendment goes not give you the right to deliberately slander another person, which is what Breitbart did by intentionally editing that tape to make it look like something it wasn't.
- Collapse -
He did NOT edit the tape. and there is NO indication or evidence that he knowingly presented an edited tape with the intention of slandering her. There's no case.
- Collapse -
that he knowingly presented an edited tape with the intention of slandering her.
AND he actually believed "that was the whole tape/speech"?
What a naive little man. (Breithart is)
He presented it WITHOUT the intention of slandering her?
Yeah right!
- Collapse -
Is a video tape of someone speaking, when shown, a slander?
Slander would have to be something he specifically said, libel when printed, that wasn't true. If there's a disconnect it would seem to be based on time, and lack of full video, not content.
- Collapse -
"edited" tape and "slander"
The tape wasn't the complete speech, so it was edited...(by someone) and anyone that presents it as "what someone says" should know that (even dumb ole me knew it wasn't the whole speech).
Bill O'Reilly said he was wrong (and apologized) ....and he makes his living by "telling the truth"
What's the problem with someone that makes a post in a forum saying they were wrong?
- Collapse -
In general, there are four defenses to libel or slander: truth, consent, accident, and privilege. The fact that the allegedly defamatory communication is essentially true is usually an absolute defense; the defendant need not verify every detail of the communication, as long as its substance can be established.
----------------------------------
It's not really reasonable to expect that Breitbart knew she was going to reverse herself in that speech. If he had known I doubt he would have used it. The fact that it was not the whole speech is unfortunate, but irrelevant. What he posted was substantially true. He had no motive to mislead anyone.
Let's see how far she gets in court with this. Not far, I'll bet.
- Collapse -
He should sue her.
http://www.breitbart.tv/sherrod-wants-biggovernment-shut-down/
Sherrod vs the First Amendment.
http://www.breitbart.tv/cnns-cooper-apologizes-for-not-challenging-sherrods-race-baiting-delves-into-husbands-newest-controversy/
Anderson Cooper apologizes for not challenging Sherrod.
- Collapse -
...and accept victory. She's going to be like the complaining mammy in New Orleans who raised such a ruckus, and attacked a policeman at a council meeting, also shouting "shut up white boy" over and again at the same meeting and finally being charged and arrested, was after 57 years of public housing, got herself kicked out. Something "Jasper". When you got things to hide that's worse than what you're complaining about, it's not too wise to draw more attention to yourself.
CNET Forums
Operating Systems
Software
Electronics & Gadgets
Hardware
Tablets & Mobile Devices
General Help
Roadshow Autos
Chowhound
Comic Vine
GameFAQs
GameSpot
Giant Bomb
TechRepublic