Deja Vu All Over Again at the USDA

In the category of “Man, I hate it when I'm right”:

A couple of days ago, I was at the gym using the elliptical machine (boring!) and the gym had the TV tuned to Rick Sanchez's “Rick's List” show on CNN.  I usually avoid this type of tripe like the plague, but unless I wanted to spend 40 minutes staring at the calories burned readout or the second-by-second ticking down of the clock on my workout, I had no choice. 

Anyway, the subject matter for this particular edition of “Rick's List” was the fallout from the Shirley Sherrod debacle and Sanchez was delighting in this prime opportunity for sticking it to Fox News.  Called “Shirley's Story”, the segment focused on the latest developments in Sherrod's firing from the USDA and the reconsideration given her dismissal following the revelation that that dismissal had been based on—wait for it-- incomplete information. 

As we all know, everyone from the NAACP to the White House (all of whom had originally tripped all over themselves in their rush to denounce Sherrod) has been in a stampede of backtracking since realizing that in their haste to stamp out perceived racism they had neglected to view all of the facts (or even most of the facts, or even a preponderance of the facts).

I am shocked and chagrined (not)!

This type of story is all too familiar.  In fact, I wrote about this sort of thing in a previous blog entry.  Unfortunately, it looks like nothing has changed in the interim, the ultimate proof in this particular pudding being self-evident. 

But I find myself wondering who was most culpable in this whole distasteful incident:  Was it the blogger who started this tidal wave of controversy by airing a very select portion of Sherrod's speech?  The so-called “news” networks like Fox that ran with it and stirred up the pot?  Or the equally culpable parties like the NAACP and the White House that almost single-handedly ruined this woman's career and reputation (at least, temporarily) in their rush to judgment based on misinformation? 

Judging from the reactions of the parties involved, I'd say all were to blame to some extent.  While the White House and the NAACP tried to bury their mea culpas in a self-serving “defense” of being “snookered” by Fox News, Fox News itself attempted to distance itself from the mess by claiming they never reported this incident as “news”.   Pure semantics at its self-serving best.

What ever happened to accountability? 

Fox News can try all it wants to distance itself from this mess, but when they have made their money based on the hyperbolic bloviating of people like Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity (both of whom ran with this story when it was originally reported), their fate and their reputation are inextricably intertwined with them.  And deservedly so.   They deserve what they get.

Meanwhile, the reactions from the White House and society at large are more difficult to quantify, but are much more disappointing.  While President Obama shouldn't be expected to have personally reviewed Ms. Sherrod's entire speech to get “the rest of the story”,  the people who work for him and most certainly the people who initially made the recommendation to fire Sherrod surely had that responsibility. 

And as for the NAACP, while it may be admirable to have “zero tolerance” for racism of any sort, it behooves such organizations (and all of us) to consider all of the facts before making such judgments.  As for being “snookered”, shame on the NAACP for not taking responsibility for their own actions and shame on anybody who would take the word of Fox News as gospel without further corroboration.  

What does it say about us as a society that we decry those who would make uninformed assumptions about people based on the color of their skin but then accuse people of racism based on the same type of misinformed assumptions? 

There's an increasingly disturbing intolerance in this country for what used to be called freedom of expression and there's precious little effort being made to give people the benefit of the doubt in these types of situations. 

Instead of focusing on education and enlightenment through healthy debate, we focus on censorship and suppression, blackballing from our midst those who would disagree with us.  Let me tell you, folks, censorship is censorship, whether it's directed against “unpopular” thoughts and ideas or against what we consider to be more “acceptable” thought.  (i.e., what's in vogue).  And if there's one thing I've learned in my lifetime from personal observation, it's that you don't change people's underlying attitudes by suppressing their opinions. 

And I also know that my own attitude of distrust toward the media won't be changing anytime soon if CNN's coverage of this incident is any indicator of things to come.  In my view, CNN missed a golden opportunity here to address the “big picture” issue, instead contenting themselves with using their air time for yet another self-serving opportunity to bash their rival network.  

Perhaps they should instead be asking why it is that so-called news stations continue to pump out half-truths and lies and why it is that we are all so willing to lick it up with a spoon. 

Perhaps it's time we all began asking as much.