The controversy continues over a video of Georgia director of Rural Development Shirley Sherrod at the NAACP. Sherrod, and many supporters, have objected that the tape from the NAACP event was clearly edited to cut off her comments to mislead the viewers. Andrew Breitbart released the video but insists that he did not edit it. The question is whether Sherrod can sue over the video. Most criticism is focusing on Andrew Breitbart who released the video on his media sites. Raw Story released the full video without the editing. In response, Breitbart told Fox News “this is not about Shirley and Andrew.” He appears half right given the growing condemnations directed at him.
The video itself is certainly misleading as edited.
Sherrod immediately objected that the remarks were “misconstrued.” Nevertheless, she resigned after the video was made public and was denounced by both the NAACP and Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack. She claims that she was forced to resign by the White House. The White House later issued an apology to Sherrod.
UPDATE: Vilsack has apologized to Sherrod and offered her a “unique position.”
The NAACP has now retracted the original statement below.
This video shows Sherrod recounted “the first time I was faced with having to help a white farmer save his farm” and how she viewed the farmer as trying to be “superior” to her while she controlled the money for such farmers.
“He had to come to me for help. What he didn’t know while he was taking all that time trying to show me he was superior to me was I was trying to decide just how much help I was going to give him . . . I was struggling with the fact that so many black people have lost their farmland and here I was faced with having to help a white person save their land — so I didn’t give him the full force of what I could do. I did enough.”
She notes that, to avoid any later complaints, she said she took him to see “one of his own” — a white lawyer” “I figured that if I take him to one of them, that his own kind would take care of him.”
Media Matters has responded to the story and accused Breitbart of misleading people on the story. They note that Sherrod was telling a story she had described took place decades ago when she worked for the Federation of Southern Cooperative/Land Assistance Fund. The video reportedly excluded the fact that Sherrod spoke of how she went on to work with and befriend the man. She is quoted as saying at the end of the story: “And I went on to work with many more white farmers,” she said. “The story helped me realize that race is not the issue, it’s about the people who have and the people who don’t. When I speak to groups, I try to speak about getting beyond the issue of race.”
This account is supported by the farmer’s wife who credited Sherrod with saving their land. For the video interview, click here.
There is no question that the edited material left a false impression as to the point of the speech. Before getting to the possible legal consequences of such editing, it is important to note that the added material is redeeming but still leaves some disturbing racial elements in the speech. First, the video appears to show a few members of the audience responding positively to the racially-loaded portions of the speech, though that is subject to interpretation. Moreover, these audience comments are not made by Sherrod. However, it is disturbing to hear positive reactions to that portion of the speech. One possible interpretation is that the audience understood where she was going with the speech or was simply encouraging her in a build up to the crescendo of the speech. Second, Sherrod clearly states that roughly 20-25 years ago, she was viewing individuals in strikingly racial terms. That would put this story around the late 1980s and 1990s. It is pretty shocking to hear that Sherrod was still thinking of that white should work with their “own kind” and viewed the case in largely racial terms. The ultimate result of Sherrod overcoming race is commendable, but I have to say that I do not agree that it fully answers the concerns about this story. I would be very disturbed to hear that a white politician was in 1986 uncomfortable with fully assisting black people and actively sought to have “one of their kind” help them. It may be a sign of my age, but 1986 doesn’t feel that long ago and I would have been appalled to hear such views at that time. Moreover, the racial elements of the speech seemed to in part explain the earlier view in light of how black farmers were being treated. In defense of Sherrod, it has been noted that she was working for the Federation of Southern Cooperative/Land Assistance Fund, which specifically aids black farmers.
Putting aside this issue, the editing was clearly intended to make the story worse than it was. She uses the racially loaded story to explain that “That’s when it was revealed to me that it’s about poor versus those who have.” That is a very different story where she was trying to explain how she learned to overcome racial sentiments. Other leaders like the late Henry Byrd Jr., made similar redemptive speeches. While I am still bothered by the fact that this was a revelation in the 1980s or 1990s (as opposed to the 1950s or 1960s), it is still a very different story than shown on the video released by Breitbart.
The question is whether there is legal recourse for such editing. There is but it is not easy. An employment action based on being pressured to resign is doubtful. Company and government lawyers often prefer employees to resign because it effectively waives a host of statutory and common law protections. Sherrod herself has stated that she is not sure she even wants her job back. It would have been a far stronger case if she had forced termination proceedings. However, at least one expert thinks she might have a case under employment law.
John Dean wrote a terrific piece on this issue.
The most obvious claims would be false light and defamation.
The Restatement Second defines the tort of false light:
652E. Publicity Placing Person in False Light
One who gives publicity to a matter concerning another that places the other before the public in a false light is subject to liability to the other for invasion of his privacy, if
(a) the false light in which the other was placed would be highly offensive to a reasonable person, and
(b) the actor had knowledge of or acted in reckless disregard as to the falsity of the publicized matter and the false light in which the other would be placed.
This would certainly seem to be a case of intentional or reckless act. It could also be claimed to be highly offensive to a reasonable person. However, the editor can claim that the tape was meant to show not just the racially loaded comments of a speaker but the reaction of the audience to that portion of the speech. Moreover, Sherrod is still admitting to pretty disturbing racial views in her earlier view of white farmers from the 1980s or 1990s. That is not an entirely complete defense, however, because it still does not explain why the editor would cut out the point of the story.
False light cases have resulted in high damages against news organizations as in this case. However, this verdict was later overturned, which rejected the very use of false light as a tort action.
Some states have curtailed or abandoned false light because such cases can be properly heard in defamation cases. In this case, Sherrod would be considered a public figure or limited public figure. As such, she would need to prove that the editor or people like Breitbart acted with knowledge of the falsity or reckless disregard of the falsity. The question is whether it was false in terms of what was intended to be shown. The editor could claim that he or she was seeking to show the racial elements at the NAACP in response to that organization’s criticism of the Tea Party. That is the position taken by Breitbart in interviews in response to outrage over his role in the controversy,here
Of course, if Sherrod were to sue, she would likely make it past initial motions to dismiss and could secure embarrassing discovery in the case, including possible internal emails and communications on the purpose of the editing and release of the video.
Buddha–
I’ll join if we can change the name to WWTT–World Wrestling the Truth Team!
😉
Elaine,
The World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. is a “wrestling federation”.
They are to actual Greco-Roman wrestling what Breitbart’s sites are to actual journalism – they aren’t really wrestlers they just play them on TV, except played for fun instead of Neocon propaganda.
“One of the media people added the “fact” that the farmer was in the KKK. She said that she did not know, but suspected it.”
You mean like you Breitbart clowns added the “fact” Ms Sherrod “is a racist”?
TraderB–
An excerpt from the letter the Southern Poverty Law Center sent to the FBI:
“While researching the deaths, we found dozens of additional victims of racial violence who could not be included
on the Memorial because there simply was not enough known about the circumstances of their deaths. We suspect
that some were killed by white supremacists to intimidate the black community or to thwart the Movement.”
So answer this for me: The name of Hosie Miller is not included on the list the SPLC sent to the FBI. Is that proof that he wasn’t killed by a white farmer?
********
Buddha,
I can’t respond in the affirmative until I know what WWE stands for.
You know, I’m having a hard time typing this comment because I’m laughing so hard thinking that one should go to Glenn Beck to get the “other side.”
**********
P.S. to TraderB: Please don’t send me to Not-So-Brightbart’s site. He’s a partisan hack and hate merchant. I’m not “into” reading right-wing propaganda.
Herr Goebbels, your credibility is calling on line one.
It wanted you to know it has run away from home along with your effectiveness and they won’t be returning.
Elaine,
I had already read the blog at philly.com and responded to it. That is where I saw the allegation that he was shot in the back. I do not remember hearing Sherrod say it. One of the media people added the “fact” that the farmer was in the KKK. She said that she did not know, but suspected it.
“Andrew Breitbart has a job to do and he does it well. Breitbart’s job is to lie and distort the truth in order to advance a right-wing agenda, embarrass liberals, and undermine the Obama administration.
Breitbart is not a journalist, researcher, or pundit. He is a propagandist. He operates several websites (BigGovernment, BigJournalism, and BigHollywood), where he and other right-wing bloggers spew their political pornography. The articles that appear on these websites are contemporary versions of what historian Richard Hofstadter called, in a famous 1964 essay, the “paranoid style” of American politics practiced by extreme conservatives.
Breitbart is part of the “paranoid style” conservative echo chamber that includes Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Mark Levin, and thousands of lesser-known activists who use a combination of talk radio, Fox News, dozens of conservative publications, and the new media (emails, blogs, youtube, facebook) to mobilize support for their right-wing crusade. Breitbart was a featured speaker at the Tea Party conference in Nashville in February and is a frequent guest on Fox News and right-wing TV and radio talk shows. His websites are propaganda vehicles for building a political movement. Unlike Fox News, he doesn’t even pretend to be “fair and balanced.” What much of America learned this week is that Andrew Breitbart is unfair and unbalanced.”
Read the rest at Why Does Anyone Take Andrew Breitbart Seriously?
Elaine,
There may be a future for us as WWE tag team wrestling champions. 😉
Awwww.
What’s the matter, Propaganda Troll?
Facts got your tongue?
TraderB–
There’s facts–and there’s facts. Of course, some of us may look at the facts and news reports differently.
From Philly.com
Hosie Miller: Shirley Sherrod’s dad, and a casualty in a forgotten war
July 21, 2010
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/attytood/Hosie_Miller_Shirley_Sherrods_dad_and_a_casualty_in_a_forgotten_war.html
Excerpt:
A grand jury investigated the case, and no one was charged. All of the grand jurors were white, as was typically the case before the passage of the landmark civil rights legislation of the mid-1960s. From that incident, a movement was born. Indeed, according to this article, Shirley Sherrod’s mother — Grace Hall Miller — became the leader of the civil rights movement in Baker County after the killing, organizing marches and other protests from her home. The then 17-year-old Shirley Miller decided to stay in the South and become an activist; she soon married one of the leaders of the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee, or SNCC, a man by the name of Charles Sherrod. Shirley Sherrod told CNN that “”I decided to stay in the South and work for change.”
How unusual was it for a black man to be killed by a white man in the Deep South up through the mid-1960s with no one brought to justice. Way too common. We hear a lot about one particular killing in Mississippi — the 1964 murder of a trio of civil rights activists that included two white college kids from up North — but in reality dozens of black men were killed for taking a stand, for trying to vote or just on a whim. If you want to read something sobering, check out this letter from 2007 from the Southern Poverty Law Center, asking the FBI to investigate some 74 additional unsolved deaths from the era.
For example:
Banks, Isadore – Marion, Ark., 1954
Banks’ charred corpse was found chained to a tree. Black press reports speculated he was killed by whites who wanted his land. His property was later rented by white farmers.
Bolden, Larry – Chattanooga, Tenn., 1958
Bolden, 15, was shot by a white policeman. No arrests were made.
Brazier, James – Dawson, Ga., 1958
Brazier was beaten to death in front of his wife and children by two police officers. County Sheriff Z.T. Matthews was later quoted in the Washington Post saying, “There’s nothing like fear to keep niggers in line.”
Brewer, Thomas – Columbus, Ga., 1956
Brewer was instrumental in forming a local chapter of the NAACP in 1937. He was shot seven times outside his office by white politician Lucio Flowers. A grand jury failed to indict.
Brooks, Hilliard – Montgomery, Ala., 1952
Brooks was shot by a police officer after initially refusing to get off a city bus when the driver claimed he had not paid his fare. A coroner said the murder was justified because Brooks resisted arrest.
Brown, Charles – Yazoo City, Miss., 1957
A white man shot Brown, who was visiting the white man’s sister. The Justice Department handed the case over to the state.
Brown, Jessie – Winona, Miss., 1965
The 1965 NAACP annual report claimed white farmer R.M. Gibson killed Brown.
Brumfield, Carrie – Franklinton, La., 1967
Brumfield was found shot to death in his car on a rural road. He was shot once in the chest with a .22-caliber revolver.
Brumfield, Eli – McComb, Miss., 1961
Police officer B.F. Elmore alleged self-defense after shooting Brumfield. Police claimed Brumfield jumped from his car with a pocket knife after police pulled him over for speeding.
Now that’s just the letter, “B”, OK? There’s 65 more. And you’ll notice that Hosie Miller — gunned down by a white man in a dispute over cows — isn’t even on the list. You have to wonder how many more Hosie Millers there was in a place like Georgia.
Here’s a link to the letter referenced in the Philly.com article
http://www.onthemedia.org/files/FBIletter_re_forgotten.pdf
Everything that comes from a Breitbart site is a distortion when not an outright lie.
Go peddle your propaganda swill to the Tea Baggers. They aren’t so big on facts as long as it promotes racist bullshit.
We’re a fact based lot in these parts, TraitorB
And as such, you’ll achieve nothing in this forum but make your boss look like more of liar than he already does.
Which is fine. Keep it coming, Neocon nitwits.
It further erodes his efficacy when you come here and get debunked and un-spun. And I think I speak for all the regular posters here in saying we’d love noting more than Breitbart and his minions to have just about as much credibility as the KKK.
Here’s the link since the CNN video didn’t embed . . .
http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2010/07/24/nr.sherrod.father.cnn?iref=allsearch
TraitorB,
“Despite allegations that he was shot in the back, it states that the bullet penetrated his chest, abdomen and liver.”
Seems that’s just another lie by implication from you Neocon trolls. Sherrod tells the story herself which not only confirms murder, but your ‘lil fact. Also, a Grand Jury convenes in the situs of the crime, not the residence of the victim, as the situs is the proper venue for prosecution. Now come on and tell us she doesn’t know any better than you, Andy’s Handpuppet.
Elaine M. wrote
“Don’t tell me you think I’m trying to pull a Breitbart????? In all the news articles I’ve read and news reports I’ve listened to no one has suggested it was an “alleged ” murder.”
Those are the same people who called Sherrod a racist, until they got the other side from Glenn Beck.
You are also doing the same thing to Breitbart. His video contains the phrase Professor Turley cited at changing the whole meaning of her comments. Listen to it and tell me whether you hear her saying, “That’s when it was revealed to me that it’s about poor versus those who have.” It is at at 1:44.
http://biggovernment.com/abreitbart/2010/07/19/video-proof-the-naacp-awards-racism2010/#idc-cover
Elaine M,
None of writers know any more than you or I. The only information we have is his death certificate. Despite allegations that he was shot in the back, it states that the bullet penetrated his chest, abdomen and liver. It states that he lived in Mitchell County, not Baker County, as she stated. He died in Dougherty County.
His murder is not on the list sent to the FBI by the Southern Poverty Law Center. They sent in the black murders needing further investigation.
Elaine,
I like the suggestion.
W=c,
Thanks for the info. I’ll be forwarding the offending e-mail to the Feds.
Buddha,
“allegedly human”–Good one!
Now that this Neocon-man has gotten blowback from the Sherrod incident maybe we should refer to him as Andrew Not-So-Brightbart.
TraitorB,
Alleged murder?
You mean like Neocon Andrew Breitbart is allegedly human?
Albeit a poor example of a man regardless.
TraderB–
Don’t tell me you think I’m trying to pull a Breitbart????? In all the news articles I’ve read and news reports I’ve listened to no one has suggested it was an “alleged ” murder.
What is “the other side?” If you have information to prove that Sherrod’s father was not killed by a white farmer, I’ll listen.
*********
Despite adversity, Shirley Sherrod has history of civil service
By Krissah Thompson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 22, 2010
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/21/AR2010072106437.html
Excerpt: Shirley Sherrod is a woman who has been failed by the system again and again.
She was a 17-year-old high school senior when a white man shot her father, Hosie Miller, in the back. A grand jury refused to bring murder charges.
***
From The Nation
In Shirley Sherrod Case, White House Falls for Another Right-Wing ‘Scandal’
Greg Mitchell
July 20, 2010
http://www.thenation.com/blog/37762/shirley-sherrod-case-media-and-white-house-fall-another-false-right-wing-scandal
Excerpt: CNN also revealed that Sherrod’s father was killed by a “white farmer” who was never prosecuted. An attorney from Alabama who has long known Sherrod referred to the killer as “KKK” but Sherrod did not make that claim.
Elaine M wrote:
“I wonder how you would have felt if you were a young black woman whose father was killed by a white farmer who was never prosecuted for his crime.”
It is an alleged murder. We have not heard the other side.