If you missed Part 1: My Yahoo News Exclusive-Q&A: Andrew Breitbart.
Part 4: Andrew Breitbart on our mutual Glenn Beck beef
Just days after the release of his new book “Righteous Indignation: Excuse Me While I Save the World” I was able to sit down with Andrew Breitbart and discuss everything from his strategy (“the primer”), a jaw-dropping interview with MSNBC hack Martin Bashir, and the beef with Glenn Beck. Since both him and I appeared in the Daily Caller’s article on this topic, I figured it was only proper to get his opinion while I had the chance. After all, there were serious charges being made. Breitbart’s beef brought him into a lawsuit due to the misrepresentation of context over the Shirley Sherrod ordeal; whereas my beef was about straight up plagiarism.
But before we get to that here is what Andrew Breitbart had to say in regards to the Glenn Beck beef over Shirley Sherrod, and how in another instance he was sticking up for his writers first and foremost. Beck’s on air response to the Daily Caller article was immature and dishonest. He goes as far as introducing a minimalist conspiracy theory that the author, Matthew Boyle, is more or less operating as a journalist-hitman because Beck didn’t run James Okeefe’s hidden camera videos with NPR executives. Breitbart explains in a more coherent way how these events took place. First, the transcript, verbatim, of our discussion on the topic; then video of Beck’s on air response. Lastly, the plagiarism which is addressed in the Daily Caller article and still remains on his site to this day.
A: Yeah, in addition to other contributors from other sites.
Q: Yeah I know, I’m on the same article as you
A: Oh wow. Are you that guy from Associated Content? Oh my god, I am so sorry. That was the worst story in there. That was the most harrowing story in there.
Q: I didn’t think he handled it very well (Daily Caller article). He came on air and made a joke of it by facetiously implying a conspiracy theory. I’m totally plagiarized on his site; he could’ve at least fixed it. But I don’t care. The message got out there, it launched, a bunch of people picked up on it, it became a week long tv spot, cool.
A: I told people from my site that complained to me about this phenomenon; I said I am aware of it. I spoke to a producer to try and remedy it. And I saw partial alterations to try and correct it. It wasn’t perfect but it was better; as far as my content. But I noticed it was happening with other people within my family of sites. And I said to them “this is up to you, these are your stories that are vibrant and vital and the chances of them seeing the light of day if it wasnt for Glenn Beck are maybe one in a thousand. But then there is that thing called attribution and credit. So you are going to have to make the determination if you’re for getting the message out and fighting for the cause or if you are for the other cause.” And when they decided to come forward it put me in a position where I had to stand by my authors. So I did. And that was the basis of that ordeal. It just so happens to coincides with something that I take a little more personal with Glenn Beck and it is pure coincidence that it is timed right now. But then it relates to the Shirley Sherrod lawsuit by discovering that he didnt just throw me under the bus, he lied in the process. And I just discovered the extent to which he attacked her and edited, sliced up, her audio and made it about her.
Q: Which it wasnt. It was about the NAACP’s reaction
A: Right. And if you look at Media Matters, of all places, chronicled the first (inaudible) Glenn Beck audio where he actually cut it up into little 5 and 10 second vignettes from a large excerpt that we had posted that included her redemptive narrative about it not being about black versus white but rather rich versus poor. And he certainly missed the big picture. He said on the show that this was “Big Government” so he credited it but he didnt read from it and he didnt point out the massive context of the previous week’s battle which was between the Tea Party and the NAACP by lying and claiming that the “n” word was said at a Capitol Hill Tea Party the day before Obamacare passed.
Q: Yeah I tried to get in touch with you over that affair. When you offered ten grand for proof of that happening I tried to get in touch with you to match you.
A: Oh really? But then I offered one hundred thousand (laughter)
Q: Yeah, then I couldnt keep up
A: You know I have been fighting for the integrity of the Tea Party which is now a million strong. Why is it that one goofy guy with a mortgage and two car payments is the only guy out there defending the Tea party? The mainstream media just thinks that these are the rubes from fly-over country and they have no desire to protect their integrity.
From February 10, 2011
_________________________________________________________________
END NOTE: This is not an attack on Beck. There is a difference between a baseless attack on someone and holding them accountable. As this sitaution was developing I spoke with others mentioned in the Daily Caller article in regards to this. Their concern was that the left would hype this up as the right eating their own. Liberty Chick had the foresight to not only see that but also told me that Beck would probably react the exact same way as he ended up responding. She was right and that was the most disappointing part. Integrity would’ve prevented that. Beck responded the same way as if this was an attack leveled by Media Matters. It was nothing more than like-minded fans and supporters trying to bring an issue to light after not being able to make headway with Beck and staff on their own. My charge of plagiarism is the most serious charge that can be leveled on a person in the communications field. Yet is was brushed aside. If Beck would like to maintain that he is a man of integrity then he will live up to his slogan: “The Truth Has No Agenda”. I have told the truth, Matthew Boyle (Daily Caller) has told the truth, and Andrew Breitbart has told the truth. Glen Beck has avoided it. I do not need to add the disclaimer of the importance and impact of what both of Beck’s shows accomplish; that is like the stupid disclaimer after a suicide bombing attack that everyone feels they need to make. The qualifier “But most muslims are peaceful…” is meaningless. There are always exceptions. To date Beck has only lacked integrity once. This was a call for him to correct it. To date he hasn’t.
Ameristroika 