Another "Beer Summit"? Breitbart Wants To Meet With Sherrod

A day after Shirley Sherrod announced her intent to sue blogger Andrew Breitbart, Breitbart has offered to meet with her privately. During an interview with Newsweek, Breitbart says that "This thing has gotten to a place that’s far beyond where it should be." Breitbart then said he would like to discuss the matter privately with Sherrod :

[Breitbart] I’d be more than happy to meet with her in private and have a discussion with her.

[Interviewer] Is that an invitation?

[Breitbart] Sure, I’ll go whoever she wants. I’ll go to Albany, Ga. I’ll go anywhere to have a private discussion with her.

Although stranger things have happened, I seriously doubt that this "beer summit" will take place.

Sherrod to Sue Breitbart; Probably Has Stronger Suit Against The USDA

Shirley Sherrod says she will sue conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart. Breitbart posted a heavily edited speech that Sherrod delivered at an NAACP event. The portion of the speech, along with commentary on Breitbart's blog, misleadingly portrays Sherrod as a racist. The full version of the tape, however, paints a completely different story (see here).

It is unclear what type of action Sherrod will bring, but she will probably sue for libel. In order to prevail, she will have to prove that Breitbart acted with actual malice. This standard requires that Sherrod prove that Breitbart published information about her that he knew was false or that he acted with reckless disregard for the truth. Although this is normally a tough standard, Sherrod might prevail, given the circumstances of the scandal. It will be difficult, however, given the First Amendment interests at stake.

Stronger Case Against the USDA
Sherrod probably has an even stronger lawsuit against the government (unless she is a "political appointee," which would change this analysis significantly; update below). USDA officials forced her out of her government job without due process of law. She was not given the opportunity to explain herself, nor did her supervisors listen to the full speech before demanding her resignation.

Federal statutes and constitutional law provide procedural protections for government employees who face potential discharge. Although Sherrod has not indicated that she will sue the government, she would probably have an even better chance with that litigation.

Links to this article: Ta-Nehisi Coates, The Atlantic, Sherrod's Chances

Update: Readers here and elsewhere have made very good points. First, some readers have argued that Sherrod should not sue the government because she can make a stronger statement in a litigation against Breitbart. After all, the government has apologized and offered her another position. I do not question the soundness of those claims. Nonetheless, saying that a particular course of action is stronger from a legal perspective does not mean that the plaintiff should actually take that path.

Second, at least one reader at The Atlantic has pointed out that Sherrod was a "political appointee." If this is true, then her chances against the government under any legal theory are sharply diminished. This does not alter the difficulty of a libel action against Breitbart. Both paths represent an uphill battle.

Vilsack Reviewing Sherrod Firing, But She Is Not Sure She Wants the Job

Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack is reviewing his decision to fire Shirley Sherrod. Vilsack fired Sherrod after he viewed a misleading video that suggested she discriminated against white farmers.

The misleading video was posted by conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart and subsequently aired on Fox News. Rather than investigating the facts, Vilsack demanded that Sherrod resign.

One day later, after media and blogs have aired the entire content of Sherrod's speech, Breitbart's lie has been made public and Sherrod's name has been cleared. It turns out that Sherrod was encourage the audience not to think of the world in racial terms (rather than condoning bigotry). Vilsack is reviewing the firing in light of these new developments.

Sherrod, however, seems torn about the prospect of working for the USDA again. During an interview with CNN, she describe the possibility as "bittersweet." Sherrod is upset that after such a long career assisting farmers, she was pressured to leave without any investigation into the facts surrounding the controversy. Sherrod says she is unsure how the agency will treat her if she returned.

My Take
Sherrod sounds like a highly rational individual.

See also:

This Is How Post-Racialism Looks: Another Take on the Firing of Shirley Sherrod

Lessons For the NAACP From the Shirley Sherrod Fiasco.

Lessons For the NAACP From the Shirley Sherrod Fiasco

The NAACP has admitted that it was "snookered" by Fox News and Andrew Breitbart. Earlier this week, Breitbart posted a misleading excerpt of a speech that Shirley Sherrod, now a former USDA official, delivered at an NAACP-sponsored event. The portion of the tape suggests that Sherrod, in her capacity as a USDA official, harbored racism towards a white farmer and did not effectively help him to protect his land. Fox News ran a story on the subject that condemned Sherrod. The broader context, portrayed on the full tape, paints a more innocent and inspiring picture.

Sherrod was referring to her representation of a white individual 24 years ago. At the time she worked for a nonprofit organization that assisted farmers seeking to keep their land. Although she thought that her client was privileged by race, she learned through dealing with him that he was vulnerable by poverty. Sherrod offered the story to encourage the audience to move beyond simply thinking of race as a source of inequality.

So, rather than being a bigot, as portrayed by Breitbart and Fox News, Sherrod exhibited the maturity that life experience brings. Also, Sherrod worked to help the farmer she described in her story. In fact, his wife says that she is a "friend for life." Sherrod also has a long record of accomplishment with respect to civil rights.

People who know Sherrod have emailed me, and they describe her as a dignified individual who respects others and who works hard to protect disadvantaged individuals. They also urged me to write on the subject.

Many liberal bloggers and commentators who have addressed this topic have focused on Breitbart and Fox News. These, however, are easy targets. I will instead focus on the NAACP. I believe that the NAACP could learn many lessons from this fiasco.

NAACP Afraid of Race?
The NAACP exhibited a degree of fear about race that is odd for an organization that deals with racial discrimination. Rather than fully investigating the record of events, the NAACP immediately released a terse statement condemning Sherrod. The organization rushed to racial judgment.

It is difficult to separate the organization's reaction to Sherrod from its controversial criticism of racist "elements" in the Tea Party. In response, the Tea Party and conservative bloggers accused the NAACP of being a bigoted organization. Once the misleading footage of Sherrod emerged, the organization dismissed her as a bigot in order to protect its own image.

This rush to judgment is intolerable and, ironically, suggests that the organization feared some of the public backlash that might come from dealing with questions of race in a thoughtful -- rather than kneejerk -- manner. While race remains a delicate and feared topic in the US, the NAACP should not view race in the same manner.

NAACP Technologically Unsavvy
The NAACP also acted in a very unsophisticated fashion, given the state of media technologies. In the age of Youtube, it is very easy to alter or edit a person's words to create misleading footage. Fox News and Breitbart have a history of doing this. For a major civil rights organization to fall for a "gotcha" video and immediately condemn a civil rights veteran is absolutely unacceptable.

More Important Race Issues
At present, the most widely known advocacy of the NAACP in 2010 involves condemning "elements" of the Tea Party and dismissing Sherrod as a bigot. These are not the most pressing racial issues that people of color face in the US or globally.

The organization should have more prominent advocacy on eduction, criminal justice, immigration, healthcare, and other issues that impact the lives of persons of color. These structural concerns are more pertinent than Breibart, Fox News, or "elements" of the Tea Party. Looking for a boogey man represents an outmoded way of thinking about racial inequality. Structural racial inequality matters much more than individual bigotry.

See also:

Shirley Sherrod Wants to Educate President Obama On Issues of Race

This Is How Post-Racialism Looks: Another Take on the Firing of Shirley Sherrod

Vilsack Reviewing Sherrod Firing, But She Is Not Sure She Wants the Job.