Faux News Exec Confirms it Did Peddle Sherrod Story Before She Was Fired

July 29, 2010 9:09 am ET by Eric Boehlert

It's always helpful when people inside Fox News confirm what Media Matters has http://mediamatters.org/mobile/research/201007220004">reported as fact, even if the channel's outside defenders prefer to toil in conspiracy as they flail around desperately trying to make up excuses for Rupert Murdoch's channel. Not that I think this confirmation from inside Fox News will quiet the online boo birds, but it's worth noting now that they're claiming both Media Matters and Fox News are lying about the facts in the case.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201007260016">Good luck with that one guys.

This by-now tiresome debate centers around whether or not Fox News jumped on Andrew Breitbart's bogus Shirley Sherrod smear campaign. We all know that on the day it broke online, Bill O'Reilly hyped the story on his primetime show, presented Sherrod as a racist, and demanded she "resign immediately." Of course, at the time O'Reilly didn't have the slightest clue what the whole story of the Sherrod tape was. But that didn't stop him from maligning a black women in the Obama administration. (O'Reilly later apologized to Sherrod.)

So if O'Reilly was demanding Sherrod's ouster, that meant Fox News covered the story before she was forced out, right? Not quite. While his show tapes at 5 p.m., it doesn't air until 8 p.m., and Sherrod resigned shortly before 8 p.m. and July 19. So technically Fox News, or so the claim goes, didn't cover the story before she resigned and so all those people who claim Fox peddled the Sherrod attack are smearing Fox News!

But of course, Fox News did peddle the story before Sherrod resigned. Fox News peddled the story online. And Fox News peddled it in two different online forums prior to Sherrod's resignation on July 19.

And in http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fdyn.politico.com%2Fprintstory.cfm%3Fuuid%3D1B47C63B-18FE-70B2-A88568269D9BA857">a new report from Politico, Fox News Senior Vice President of News Michael Clemente confirms that fact ...

More: http://mediamatters.org/blog/201007290006


If they're admitting their guilt, surely Shirley can sue them with ease?

that a week after she resigned, we're still talking about this." What a great line by Clemente. Oh yes, delude yourself into thinking that you have so much power. It is still being talked about because you were such racist boneheads. Are you proud of that distinction, Mr. Clemente?

It was OK for Fox news to lie because "not all the facts were known at the time"?


I found this.......

The Media Can Legally Lie
FOX appealed the case, and on February 14, 2003 the Florida Second District ... The Court held that Akre's threat to report the station's actions to the FCC ... the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. ...
www.relfe.com/media_can_legally_lie.html - Cached - Similar

As that's a Florida court ruling, does that mean they are only allowed to lie in Florida?

And why does that court case always get brought up in threads that expose Faux's latest transgressions?

What this proves is that Faux News is not a legitimate news organization. Legitimate news organizations do not assert their First Amendment right to lie to the American public.

Anyway, this time they are admitting they played a part in Shirley's character assassination so that court case isn't relevant anyway.

Not legally, I'm sure, but treason nonetheless.

Without accurate info, citizens can't make meaningful voting decisions.

That -- quite deliberately -- undermines the entire democratic process.

Those responsible should be in little, tiny prison cells waiting to walk their last mile.

:thumbsup: