Andrew Breitbart's Legacy 'Just Stunts and Demagoguery,' Suggests NYTimes Editor Bruce Headlam
New York Times media editor Bruce Headlam was less than gracious after the sudden death of conservative media activist Andrew Breitbart, citing in a Times webcast “his willingness to push the limits of what he saw as journalism, what a lot of other people saw as just stunts and demagoguery.”
Media reporter Jeremy Peters wrote the official Times obituary Friday for Breitbart, who died suddenly at age 43 after collapsing while walking outside his home in Los Angeles: “Andrew Breitbart, Conservative Blogger, Dies at 43.” As a news story it was balanced, but compared to the usual Times obituary it was certainly critical, starting in the third paragraph:
Mr. Breitbart was as polarizing as he was popular. On the political right he was hailed in the same breath with Rush Limbaugh and Matt Drudge as a truth-teller who exposed bias and corruption. On the left, he was derided by many as a provocateur who played fast and loose with the facts to further his agenda.
That line also served as the text box to the story, harsh words for an obituary: “An online presence who was as polarizing as he was popular.”
Still, the Times gave Breitbart his due as a media revolutionary: “What Mr. Limbaugh was to radio and what Mr. Drudge was to the Internet, Mr. Breitbart was to online video and images.” The paper noted he helped Arianna Huffington launch the Huffington Post and gave him a backhanded compliment that he was a “more complex figure” than his liberal critics allowed, because he “supported gay rights.”
Media editor Bruce Headlam was less sympathetic in a webcast posted Thursday, which opened: “Andrew Breitbart was controversial, not for his polemics, which weren’t different than you’d find in a lot of other right-wing blogs, but his willingness to push the limits of what he saw as journalism, what a lot of other people saw as just stunts and demagoguery.”
- Clay Waters's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
2 Words
Submitted by Blonde on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 12:58pm.
Bruce who?
This idiot isn't fit to lick the bottom of Andrew Breitbart's rollerblades.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Brucie takes himself too seriously.
Submitted by drsamherman on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 1:07pm.
He is going down the narcissistic self-important journalist path, something which is all too common between old line media and new online media players. Brucie's ilk is losing its importance and relevance, and he can't handle the inevitable change. There is enough history about how print media dismissed radio, who in turn dismissed standard television, who in turn dismissed cable news. Same here. Problem is, Brucie and the NYT can't get past their "holier than thou" thing.
Inevitable change
Submitted by Blonde on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 1:14pm.
Funny how that works, isn't it. It's like elementary teachers teaching children how to write out words for checks. By the time the kid is old enough to handle banking, there will be no more checks.
The old media is dead, it just hasn't realized it yet. My mom still takes the Sunday paper, and it keeps getting smaller, they've gone back to the nasty ink that gets all over my white leather furniture, the have eliminated the full color Sunday magazine(s) and have cut back on stuff like Lifestyle, Books, and the Society section. Why bother?
I tell my mother she can read all that stuff on-line, but she likes the touch/feel of the paper (and the ads, I guess). But will the internet generation ever be attached like that again? I don't think so.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Headlamp
Submitted by mmilesll on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 1:20pm.
This guy is a worthless pos. You know for years the left would and does make all kinds of hateful remarks about the right, one of the things Andrew taught us was to not take it anymore and get back in their faces. So Headlamp tell us how many people have ever heard or want to know about you. NOBODY.
Bruce Headlam indeed
Submitted by russedav on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 2:55pm.
His head's on the lam and hasn't been seen in years, explaining his deranged comments about Andrew that rather expose his own lunacy.
Nevertheless I was sad to hear and do regret Andrew was foolish enough to support the fraud of "gay rights" so well exposed by "The gay invention" (http://touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=18-10-036-f).
I regret he, like most "conservatives" (which is why I'm rather an independent due to such dangers from gullible "conservatives no less than "liberals") he was so easily deceived by the fascist fraud and doesn't know the truth from "ex-gays" whom God has graciously helped escape the deathstyle by which Andrew sadly didn't seem to mind the proven mentally ill perverts (deranged fascists like Bwaney Fwank who are falsely called "gay") being enslaved (www.exodusinternational.org). Also see further aspects of the sex fraud perpetrated by deranged, psychotic child-molesting fascist pervert Kinsey & company and their clever media coverup (even helped by so-called "conservatives") at www.DrJudithReisman.org).
Red Eye last night ...........
Submitted by chazzy-kc on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 3:00pm.
.....was fantatsic! Anyone who was fortunate enough to see their one hour laughfest of celebratory love for the unique, passionate, inclusive and complex man that was Andrew Breitbart will never forget it. His was a journey of discovery that found a motherlode.
I have been unable to find anywhere on the web that it is available, though I have been told that itunes has every episode of Greg Gutfeld's brilliant satirical show which Breitbart frequented with regularity.....besides Gutfeld (who clearly loved the guy) and the regular Andy Levy , Thadeus McCotter, Ann Coulter and Ben Shapiro were among those who affectionately remembered Andrew and gave a real and heartwarming remebrance of his worth and importance to the future of our country.and its culture.
All unanimously believed that his death will advance his own objectives of turning the left wing confrontational tactics right back on the left with the caveat of being 100% truthful and honest......very much unlike this insipid, disrespectful screed..
I recorded it
Submitted by Blonde on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 3:28pm.
But I have no idea how to get it out of the box (I have DISH).
If anyone can tell me how, I'll give it a shot and post it on my blog.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Bruce lets review some NYT famous retractions
Submitted by antiObamunist on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 3:14pm.
And proven false nonretractions.
http://conservapedia.com/Alger_Hiss_and_the_Volkogonov_Affair
http://www.strategyunit.net/2006/12/the-strategy-on-iran-and-the-ny-time...
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/02/waiting-for-correcto.php
http://m.popsci.com/military-aviation-amp-space/article/2009-07/new-york...
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuvia_Grossman
http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2010/08/03/the-new-york-times-issues-a-cor...
However, you want us to believe you are so protective of your so called journalism that it important to issue corrections like this......
Because of an editing error, a caption on Saturday with an article about the service Catch Your Cat, Etc., a for-hire pet-cat catcher, described incorrectly a picture of the cat Vivian Grant hiding behind a sofa. It was taken after she had been corralled and released, not before.
Yea, that is journalism.
I how the NYT will handle the
Submitted by WarEagle66 on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 4:42pm.
I wonder how the NYT will handle the obit for Jayson Blair when he kicks the bucket?
Conspiracy and Andrew Breitbart
Submitted by berlet98 on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 7:13pm.
Conspiracy and Andrew Breitbart
American conspiracy theories come in all stripes, from the goofy to the believable, from the bizarre to the likely, from the cruel to the fawning.
Did Lee Harvey Oswald act alone? Was 9/11 an inside job? Did Whitney Houston intentionally kill herself?
The very untimely death of arch-conservative Andrew Breitbart promises to fuel suspicions that foul play was involved. Indeed, another arch-conservative, radio commentator Michael Savage, has already suggested Breitbart was assassinated.
The 43 year old Breitbart, who had said three weeks earlier, ”Wait til they see what happens March first,” died near his Los Angeles home on Thursday, March first. According to the Associated Press and Reuters, the conservative firebrand had a history of heart problems and his personal website, Breitbart.com, reported he died “unexpectedly from natural causes” although no cause has yet been provided.
Indicative of official doubt as to reasons for his sudden death, the LA coroner’s office announced it would conduct an autopsy. Whatever the autopsy findings, it can be certain many will conclude Andrew Breitbart was murdered by one of his many enemies.
Aside from the deaths of Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck, no conservative’s passing would have delighted the rabid left more than Breitbart’s and his enemies began to spew their hatred in venomous articles and tweets within hours of the reports.
The taxpayer-subsidized NPR called him a “provocateur” and ”bombastic.” The Huffington Post’s Arianna Huffington was about the only prominent liberal who didn’t rip Breitbart. She couldn’t bring herself to describe his political influence but did praise him as a passionate, exuberant, and fearless friend.
WashingtonExaminer.com published a few of the earliest tweets, beginning with Slate.com’s Matt Yglesias’, “Conventions around dead people are ridiculous. The world outlook is slightly improved with @AndrewBrietbart dead.”
That mean-spirited observation was gracious compared to others including, “Andrew Breitbart now enjoying afternoon tea with Hitler good riddance you hack,” ”Andrew Breitbart died? Is it wrong that I’m happier about that than when they got bin Laden and Saddam?” ”Breitbart dead? More republicans should follow his lead,” “Andrew Breitbart is dead, He was a vile excuse for a human being,” and “Andrew Breitbart haha youre dead and in hell being a gay with hitler.”
I assume those tweets were either a consequence of President Obama’s call for more national civility or a reflection of the fear Obamians are experiencing as they await Breitbart’s tapes of Barack Obama at Harvard.
Breitbart referred to the tapes at his recent 2012 CPAC speech, . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=15359)
Unreal
Submitted by Vandamage2000 on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 9:44pm.
I never liked the guy, and then I read this:
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/09/18/andrew-breitbart-incites-violenc...
Anyone who wants to defend this guy as a saint should never be taken seriously.
~Didn't your mother ever tell you
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 9:49pm.
not to believe everything you read on the internet?
Wrathful..
Submitted by Vandamage2000 on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 9:53pm.
There is video of him saying this.
~Saying what?
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 9:58pm.
Surely you don't expect people to click on every link a braindead liberal such as yourself shows up with.
Thanks, Bru ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 10:06pm.
you saved me the time involved in putting on my dipshit stomping cleats.
MD
~It isn't worth the time, anyway
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 10:17pm.
After the Twitter war I waged yesterday I've been lazy today; I just give the rope a twitch when I see trolls coming and watch them fall over it.
For goodness sake
Submitted by Radical1979 on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 10:00pm.
He states those are his unclear moments brought on by the horrendous verbal and character attacks on him (including death threats).
Yeah, that's why I don't like Obama,: there are ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 10:03pm.
videos of him saying things.
MD
Brunette*
Submitted by cajun2 on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 10:05pm.
This is a prime example of the skewed vision of liberals.
I actually clicked on that link. I found Andrew Breitbart, not calling for violence, but rather talking about how he was being attacked personally and how he saw his country under attack. He predicted, rightfully so, that ordinary Americans were not going to surrender, but we are going to defend ourselves and our country. Especially our military, who took an OATH to do so.
No where in that article or video does Andrew call for violence but that does not stop the lying hateful rhetoric of those "compassionate tolerant " liberals who will never accept any views that dare disagree with their own, to the point of threats and violence as exhibited by the Occupiers.
~Typical
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 10:19pm.
*yawn*
Liberals are such a waste of time when they're not amusing.
Bru ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 10:25pm.
"Liberals are such a waste of time when they're not amusing."
Now that is a line for the ages.
MD
Hi Matthew*
Submitted by cajun2 on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 10:40pm.
I think I have a new tag line as well. I posted this at another web site today.
Liberals are the best explanation as to why it only takes ONE dog to herd a flock of sheep.
Excellent, cajun,---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 03/03/2012 - 12:18am.
made me grin.
MD
Two words:
Submitted by Unsane on Fri, 03/02/2012 - 10:10pm.
Source evaluation.
Tell me something, in order to become a Leftist, is it a frigging REQUIREMENT that a) you stop critical thinking or b) you just never figure out what it is to begin with?
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Apparently the truth is "a stunt"
Submitted by needle on Sat, 03/03/2012 - 11:13am.
Yeah, that sounds about right for the NYT.
How often does one feel like it is confronting Darth Vader to deal with the NYT?
PS: for the NYT journalism is an art, ever to be refined and polished, of distorting, deceiving, misleading, and misrepresenting. Little wonder they could not stomach Andrew Breitbart.
- Looking forward to the self-annihilation of the Manipulated Stories Machine.