The Obama administration has apologised to a former civil servant Shirley Sherrod after she was dismissed following a video that was posted online apparently showing her being racist.
The video had, it later transpired, been edited in a way that removed the context of her speech - and once that became evident, the White House had to say sorry.
Obama said that the man who fired her, Agriculture secretary Tom Vilsack, had "jumped the gun" because "we now live in this media culture where something goes up on YouTube or a blog and everybody scrambles."
So does the internet make us too quick to judge?
According to the 麻豆社's Kevin Connolly in Washington, Sherrod "was apparently ruthlessly dumped by people who hadn't bothered to view her entire speech, ask for a transcript or even ask for her point of view."
Joni Hudson-Reynolds, an African-American mother who blogs on American politics, agreed:
How did Sherrod get thrown under the bus? She is a victim of the 24 hour news cycle. There is an old saying "get it first but, first get it right" and this antiquated notion does not fit into the 24 hour need to know or need to report culture. Is this a teachable moment? What have we learned? The growth of Facebook and Twitter have given hundreds of millions of people the ability to respond instantly to any story.
When this happens all at the same time, the result can be a Twitterstorm - such as the one that engulfed the British actor Danny Dyer earlier this year, or the Daily Mail newspaper columnist Jan Moir in 2009.
Dyer suggested to a reader of his magazine column that he cut his ex-girlfriend's face in order to make other men not to want to be with her; Moir claimed there was "nothing natural" about the death of the Boyzone singer Stephen Gately - an article published on the day of his funeral.
The result of both controversial columns was an immediate Twitterstorm. But they had vastly different outcomes.
Dyer was quickly sacked from his job at Zoo Magazine. His latest film, Pimp, was reported to have an audience of just 24 people.
But while the Daily Mail was forced to remove advertising from around the column, Moir was ultimately exonerated - The UK Press Complaints Commission ultimately decided it would not uphold any of the record 25,000 complaints it received.
Since there was nothing factually incorrect in Moir's article, the real point was simply that a large number of people had found what she had written offensive. Was this potentially a threat to free speech?
Fleet Street Blues argued that:
The point is that the Daily Mail connects with millions of ordinary people, and it does that by reflecting their views, telling them what they want to hear about and yes, playing on their prejudices. Read the rest of Jan Moir's column - sheer dresses, the Nolan Sisters, autumn weather, pumpkin scones and the evils of maternity leave. For better or worse, this is what Mail readers want, and the Mail delivers. But the blogosphere is not always wrong.
After a blogswarm in 2004, a story broadcast by the veteran CBS journalist Dan Rather, that claimed memos critical President George W Bush when he was in training in the Air Force had been uncovered, was proved to be inaccurate.
The documents had been faked - and it was bloggers who exposed it.
And what about the many instances of "internet justice" - such as the girl exposed as a thief online, or the South Korean woman now known forever as "dog poo girl" after she let her dog foul the Seoul subway.
Does the internet make us too quick to judge? Or is there wisdom in the blogswarm?
Your comments
Comment sent via YOURSAY
19:00
113631290
Nelson emailed:The whole discussion is focused on the media and journalistic responsibilities. Aren't there also lessons for everyone who gets news from media?
Comment sent via YOURSAY
18:57
113631290
A. Eshun emails: What happened to Shirley Sherrod is an indicator of the extent to which our social and political systems have been hijacked by unscrupulous elements and how the internet has been allowed to be used as a shield from accountability and integrity.
Comment sent via SMS
18:55
108601535
Interesting comment about believing the bloggers rather than the traditional media. After this debacle how can anybody continue to hold that view? Eamonn in Kent.
Comment sent via Twitter
18:47
114343670
@麻豆社_WHYS While I might use Twitter to have news delivered to me, it doesn't exist in a vacuum; most headlines carry a link to a full story.
Comment sent via YOURSAY
18:40
113631290
Patricia emails: As a teacher, my concern is for students who often use the internet for research and who aren't sufficiently savy to know to query the source. These young people are also the most impressionable and most likely to believe what they read online. It is therefore important that we teach our young people to query their sources, read from more than one source and take information from more reputable sources.
Comment sent via Facebook
18:38
113631290
Harmony posted on Facebook
The same thing happened with the former US commander in afganistan. I'm sure the press just ranted about it without knowing in what context the guy was saying those words, and the president just fired the guy
Comment sent via Facebook
18:38
113631290
Sandra posts on Facebook
Some media outlets only what to entertain and sensationalize news to keep people interested. The problem is people who keep the gossip going without any real knowledge of the truth.
Comment sent via YOURSAY
18:36
113631290
Clifford emails:
It is such a shame that an honorable hardworking citizen is made to suffer for the mistake of a self conceited blogger. My question however is, since blogging has become such a huge phenomenon, what forms of accountability measures can we (the society)set for these bloggers?. In Sherry's case could she sue the conservative blogger for some sort of damages?
Comment sent via Twitter
18:31
114397938
Good to debate with @ajkeen on the 麻豆社 World Service World Have You Say @麻豆社_WHYS and will check out your book.
Comment sent via Facebook
18:30
113631290
Chris posted on Facebook
All I want to say is that it is in our nature to make quick judgements when we read things off the internet but we should also make it a point to get a more tangible source.
Comment sent via Facebook
18:30
113631290
John posts on Facebook:
The problem is not the internet, or even gullibility, but the rest of the media refuses to do its job of vetting the accuracy of what politicians and political groups say.
Comment sent via Twitter
18:29
113927054
RT @Nigel_Morgan: On @麻豆社_WHYS we've been joined by @AnniePaul in Kingston Jamaica. Myself and Mike Tomasky seem in agreement
Comment sent via Twitter
18:26
114397938
Andrew Keen in California now joined the debate @麻豆社_WHYS is blaming the viewers and the mob mentality in America, was on CNN this morning
Comment sent via Facebook
18:24
113631290
Pat McCurry posts on Facebook
This is what happen when things are taken out of context. Misunderstandings happen after that. They should have investigated before jumping to a snap conclusion
Comment sent via Facebook
18:23
113631290
T Scott Nance posts on Facebook
You can't blame the internet for this. That's like the old argument of saying it was the gun's fault that the insane man shot his wife.
Comment sent via Twitter
18:23
114397938
@michaeltomasky is talking about how news organisations monitor each other on @麻豆社_WHYS on 麻豆社 World Service
Comment sent via Facebook
18:23
113631290
Tom Shafer posts on Facebook:
Yes, the internet now gives us the ability to spread both truth and lies at nearly the speed of light. What seems to be missing is the critical thinking skills to differentiate the two. Sadly, this is not just limited to consumers of information, but the people who call themselves 'journalists'.
Comment sent via BLOG
18:22
113631290
phdnofuddy on the blog:
I'm pleased that President Obama clarified his position and emphasized that he would evaluate actions taken against a "rightness" ruler rather than a "politically correct" ruler. Prior to this clarification, I can understand Mr. Vilsack's interpretation of what his boss (President Obama) would expect.
Comment sent via Twitter
18:15
114397939
On @麻豆社_WHYS we've been joined by @AnniePaul in Kingston Jamaica. Myself and Mike Tomasky seem in agreement
Comment sent via Twitter
18:04
114398655
RT @Nigel_Morgan: Plugged into the 麻豆社 World Service ready to take part in the debate for World Have Your Say @麻豆社_WHYS - exciting stuff
Comment sent via BLOG
18:20
113631290
Lincoln in Fort Myers florida on the blog:
Human nature is to believe whatever we are told. We now realize that we need to be cautious in the face of hate-mongering politicians, political parties and so-called "journalists". Why is the the backlash all focused on the media and the administration? How come nobody is publicly expressing anger at the conscious action to cause this catastrophic issue?
Comment sent via Twitter
18:19
114397939
Hassan, a journalist from Cairo has joined the debate @麻豆社_WHYS talking about how in Eygpt bloggers are trusted more than newspapers!
Comment sent via YOURSAY
18:15
113631290
Devadas emails: infact the internet serves us first but doesn't always give us the truth. Here in this case of sherrod we see how internet can be misused.
Comment sent via host
18:16
113631290
On air now discussing the Shirley Sherrod controversy asking whether we are too quick to judge
Does the internet mean we're too quick to judge?
| Friday, 7 July 2010 | 18:00 - 19:00 GMT
The Obama administration has apologised to a former civil servant Shirley Sherrod after she was dismissed following a video that was posted online apparently showing her being racist.
The video had, it later transpired, been edited in a way that removed the context of her speech - and once that became evident, the White House had to say sorry.
Obama said that the man who fired her, Agriculture secretary Tom Vilsack, had "jumped the gun" because "we now live in this media culture where something goes up on YouTube or a blog and everybody scrambles."
So does the internet make us too quick to judge?
According to the 麻豆社's Kevin Connolly in Washington, Sherrod "was apparently ruthlessly dumped by people who hadn't bothered to view her entire speech, ask for a transcript or even ask for her point of view."
Joni Hudson-Reynolds, an African-American mother who blogs on American politics, agreed:
How did Sherrod get thrown under the bus? She is a victim of the 24 hour news cycle. There is an old saying "get it first but, first get it right" and this antiquated notion does not fit into the 24 hour need to know or need to report culture. Is this a teachable moment? What have we learned?
The growth of Facebook and Twitter have given hundreds of millions of people the ability to respond instantly to any story.
When this happens all at the same time, the result can be a Twitterstorm - such as the one that engulfed the British actor Danny Dyer earlier this year, or the Daily Mail newspaper columnist Jan Moir in 2009.
Dyer suggested to a reader of his magazine column that he cut his ex-girlfriend's face in order to make other men not to want to be with her; Moir claimed there was "nothing natural" about the death of the Boyzone singer Stephen Gately - an article published on the day of his funeral.
The result of both controversial columns was an immediate Twitterstorm. But they had vastly different outcomes.
Dyer was quickly sacked from his job at Zoo Magazine. His latest film, Pimp, was reported to have an audience of just 24 people.
But while the Daily Mail was forced to remove advertising from around the column, Moir was ultimately exonerated - The UK Press Complaints Commission ultimately decided it would not uphold any of the record 25,000 complaints it received.
Since there was nothing factually incorrect in Moir's article, the real point was simply that a large number of people had found what she had written offensive. Was this potentially a threat to free speech?
Fleet Street Blues argued that:
The point is that the Daily Mail connects with millions of ordinary people, and it does that by reflecting their views, telling them what they want to hear about and yes, playing on their prejudices. Read the rest of Jan Moir's column - sheer dresses, the Nolan Sisters, autumn weather, pumpkin scones and the evils of maternity leave. For better or worse, this is what Mail readers want, and the Mail delivers.
But the blogosphere is not always wrong.
After a blogswarm in 2004, a story broadcast by the veteran CBS journalist Dan Rather, that claimed memos critical President George W Bush when he was in training in the Air Force had been uncovered, was proved to be inaccurate.
The documents had been faked - and it was bloggers who exposed it.
And what about the many instances of "internet justice" - such as the girl exposed as a thief online, or the South Korean woman now known forever as "dog poo girl" after she let her dog foul the Seoul subway.
Does the internet make us too quick to judge? Or is there wisdom in the blogswarm?
Your comments
Comment sent via YOURSAY
Nelson emailed:The whole discussion is focused on the media and journalistic responsibilities. Aren't there also lessons for everyone who gets news from media?
Comment sent via YOURSAY
A. Eshun emails: What happened to Shirley Sherrod is an indicator of the extent to which our social and political systems have been hijacked by unscrupulous elements and how the internet has been allowed to be used as a shield from accountability and integrity.
Comment sent via SMS
Interesting comment about believing the bloggers rather than the traditional media. After this debacle how can anybody continue to hold that view? Eamonn in Kent.
Comment sent via Twitter
@麻豆社_WHYS While I might use Twitter to have news delivered to me, it doesn't exist in a vacuum; most headlines carry a link to a full story.
Comment sent via YOURSAY
Patricia emails: As a teacher, my concern is for students who often use the internet for research and who aren't sufficiently savy to know to query the source. These young people are also the most impressionable and most likely to believe what they read online. It is therefore important that we teach our young people to query their sources, read from more than one source and take information from more reputable sources.
Comment sent via Facebook
Harmony posted on Facebook The same thing happened with the former US commander in afganistan. I'm sure the press just ranted about it without knowing in what context the guy was saying those words, and the president just fired the guy
Comment sent via Facebook
Sandra posts on Facebook Some media outlets only what to entertain and sensationalize news to keep people interested. The problem is people who keep the gossip going without any real knowledge of the truth.
Comment sent via YOURSAY
Clifford emails: It is such a shame that an honorable hardworking citizen is made to suffer for the mistake of a self conceited blogger. My question however is, since blogging has become such a huge phenomenon, what forms of accountability measures can we (the society)set for these bloggers?. In Sherry's case could she sue the conservative blogger for some sort of damages?
Comment sent via Twitter
Good to debate with @ajkeen on the 麻豆社 World Service World Have You Say @麻豆社_WHYS and will check out your book.
Comment sent via Facebook
Chris posted on Facebook All I want to say is that it is in our nature to make quick judgements when we read things off the internet but we should also make it a point to get a more tangible source.
Comment sent via Facebook
John posts on Facebook: The problem is not the internet, or even gullibility, but the rest of the media refuses to do its job of vetting the accuracy of what politicians and political groups say.
Comment sent via Twitter
RT @Nigel_Morgan: On @麻豆社_WHYS we've been joined by @AnniePaul in Kingston Jamaica. Myself and Mike Tomasky seem in agreement
Comment sent via Twitter
Andrew Keen in California now joined the debate @麻豆社_WHYS is blaming the viewers and the mob mentality in America, was on CNN this morning
Comment sent via Facebook
Pat McCurry posts on Facebook This is what happen when things are taken out of context. Misunderstandings happen after that. They should have investigated before jumping to a snap conclusion
Comment sent via Facebook
T Scott Nance posts on Facebook You can't blame the internet for this. That's like the old argument of saying it was the gun's fault that the insane man shot his wife.
Comment sent via Twitter
@michaeltomasky is talking about how news organisations monitor each other on @麻豆社_WHYS on 麻豆社 World Service
Comment sent via Facebook
Tom Shafer posts on Facebook: Yes, the internet now gives us the ability to spread both truth and lies at nearly the speed of light. What seems to be missing is the critical thinking skills to differentiate the two. Sadly, this is not just limited to consumers of information, but the people who call themselves 'journalists'.
Comment sent via BLOG
phdnofuddy on the blog: I'm pleased that President Obama clarified his position and emphasized that he would evaluate actions taken against a "rightness" ruler rather than a "politically correct" ruler. Prior to this clarification, I can understand Mr. Vilsack's interpretation of what his boss (President Obama) would expect.
Comment sent via Twitter
On @麻豆社_WHYS we've been joined by @AnniePaul in Kingston Jamaica. Myself and Mike Tomasky seem in agreement
Comment sent via Twitter
RT @Nigel_Morgan: Plugged into the 麻豆社 World Service ready to take part in the debate for World Have Your Say @麻豆社_WHYS - exciting stuff
Comment sent via BLOG
Lincoln in Fort Myers florida on the blog: Human nature is to believe whatever we are told. We now realize that we need to be cautious in the face of hate-mongering politicians, political parties and so-called "journalists". Why is the the backlash all focused on the media and the administration? How come nobody is publicly expressing anger at the conscious action to cause this catastrophic issue?
Comment sent via Twitter
Hassan, a journalist from Cairo has joined the debate @麻豆社_WHYS talking about how in Eygpt bloggers are trusted more than newspapers!
Comment sent via YOURSAY
Devadas emails: infact the internet serves us first but doesn't always give us the truth. Here in this case of sherrod we see how internet can be misused.
Comment sent via host
On air now discussing the Shirley Sherrod controversy asking whether we are too quick to judge