The Media Mismanagement of Shirley Sherrod

Shirley Sherrod, former USDA director of Rural Development in Georgia, resigned Monday after an excerpt from a speech given at a NCAAP event in March appeared in a post by blogger Andrew Breitbart.

The day after her resignation, the full speech surfaced, showing a different message from the edited version. In context, the story of her reluctance to help white farmers was a part of her story about recognizing and overcoming racial prejudices.

The misrepresentation of the initial report hasn't seemed to slow the media down, despite the outpouring of apologies from nearly every media personality involved. If Sherrod isn't the villain, which she is still portrayed to be in some cases, it is imperative to find a replacement. Someone in this situation has to be racist, right? And now it seems as if the fact that racism is a real and important issue is supposed to make us forget that the basis of this story is contextually false and was not fact checked properly.

Keeping the story relevant, not to mention making in legitimate, makes focusing on the broader issues of race a strategic move. This media fiasco certainly hasn't hurt ratings or site views for the parties involved. I'm sure advertisers are happy that millions of people are watching this drama unfold in between commercial breaks or on the right side of the computer screen.

It's reminiscent of "War of the Worlds", presented by the CBS radio network in 1938 in which Orson Welles narrated simulated news bulletins of an alien invasion. It was fiction, but presented as news created mass hysteria (or perhaps, not - some argue the media fabricated hysterical public reaction) or, at the very least, confusion among listeners.

Most people expect news media to present an accurate representation of actual events. As news channels polarize and find a niche market, bias is becoming more common. Media consumers are learning to be more skeptical, but it is events like this one that make people question the validity of what is presented as news.

Even the media watch groups Media Matters for America, The Media Research Center and Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) have different (often editorialized and opinionate) representations of the mishandling of this story, each biased in some way.

This story provides an opportunity to question media practices, to be skeptical the information being reported and to hold media accountable for the responsibility of news reporting. Gathering sources and checking facts might be a good place to start.

Media Consumers: Beware. Be critical. Be Careful.

Sources:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/21/AR2010072103871.html

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/lachlan-markay/2010/07/22/reality-check-fox-news-hosts-had-nothing-do-shirley-sherrod-resignat

http://mediamatters.org/strupp/201007210037

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20011378-503544.html

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-07-21/andrew-breitbarts-racial-storm/

http://www.fair.org/blog/#post-15198

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/editorials/99064164.html?elr=KArksc8P:Pc:UthPacyPE7iUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUr