By John Ballard
His words.
It had to be done at the exact moment in time that the press would notice it ... I grant her that she had her redemptive transformation. I said that her humanity caused her to help the farmer, and that it's not just about race. Notice how the press conspicuously ignores that. It's in the video and it's in the text [of Breitbart's original post on the topic]. Who is doing the selective editing here? This is about destroying me. This is about the NAACP, but they've made it about me versus her. This is about exposing the Democratic Party and the progressive strategy of framing opposition to the Democratic Party agenda as racist.
I'm sorry. The news cycle is not the same as a crowded expressway where responsible drivers sometimes cause an accident in order to prevent a worse disaster. Shirleygate is about how irresponsible journalism plays out.
Not to put too much of a point on it, effective communication is not optional. The rules are pretty much the same for everyone, from parents to bosses to politicians to military commanders to scientists.
And no matter who's doing the communicating, the burden of responsibility is on the source, not the target.
Effective communication by definition does not allow misunderstanding.
Either Breitbart dropped the ball or deliberately led others astray. In either case he failed as a good communicator and arguing that lines like "This is about destroying me" are waaay out of order.
The whole of Shirley Sherrod's talk is a study in clarity.
And the whole of Breitbart's cheap shot is just as easy to understand. Saying her humanity caused her to help the farmer, and that it's not just about race. is the equivalent of mouseprint on a concert ticket. Those who buy the ticket are motivated by expecting to see the event.
The mouseprint is only there in case the event is canceled.
No comments:
Post a Comment