Hating Breitbart is a documentary aimed at debunking some of the stigmas that surround the Tea Party, a distributed proclamation that the old wave of media has become so partisan that it is inherently biased, and, most of all, a solid mass of irony.
As the newest political group attempting to become a legitimate third party pugilist in the war zone that is American politics, the Tea Party has been labeled racist, ignorant, and predominately white. The truth in these proscriptions is up for debate, just like any stereotypes affiliated with the asses and elephants that have occupied the Congress and the White House for the better part of our existence. But, debating the merits of any of these parties is not my intent here. And, full disclosure, it took three attempts to get past the opening credits of Haiting Breitbart, fearing that I was in for a two hour propaganda film about the merits of the Tea Party. Mostly ambivalent over politics in the last two elections, I had a hard time fighting the urge to simply toss the screener out the window, but then I feared it would fall into the hands of an impressionable youth still brimming with the eagerness for change and the belief in bipartisan politics.
Instead, I watched, and found that – while it certainly endorses the Tea Party movement – is not necessarily a public service announcement. In truth, the documentary tackles a blight in this country that has been caused by the conglomerates of media outlets that include CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, et. al. This is not to say that everything on the news in a sham, but this film aptly asserts that most things are sensationalized, edited, and shaped to create controversy. The statement “Breaking News” has little value other than to – most often – heighten paranoia and keep people leaning either left or right in the political spectrum.
Hating Breitbart also illuminates the wonky definitions we now have for journalism and ethical news reporting. Much of this discourse is fostered through the political scandals rife in the now-disbanded ACORN, a former coalition of community organizers that worked with low-income communities. In 2009, a man and a woman, representing themselves as a pimp and his prostitute, approached ACORN in order to find funding for a house they intended to use as a brothel. On hidden camera, they pled their cases to a number of workers at a number of ACORN locations, and were subsequently given advice on taxes, how to conceal their illicit activities, and the like.
As the documentary depicts, much of this was swept under the rug because it came from a form of deceptive journalism. Another reason was that its existence was then disseminated by Breitbart, owner of Breitbart.tv, BigGovernment.com, and Big Journalism.com. And while the Columbia Journalism Review doesn’t find the ACORN video journalism, this film forces us to ask what is, and where the line between deception and reporting is drawn.
Certainly Breitbart’s team had an agenda, one to expose ACORN as corrupt. However, this was not a novel concept; in the past ACORN had been caught in embezzlement and voter fraud scandals.
But, it’s difficult to deny that mainstream news outlets lack an agenda. Videos are cut and edited to depicts what is intended, not necessarily the whole truth. As examples we could look at the Shirley Sherrod scandal or the Reverend Jeremiah Wright debacle prior to the 2008 election. Both were caught saying some rather racist things, but these few minutes taken without the context of the entire videos are misleading…but perfect for media fodder and voter ire. For a more recent reference, just look at the Romney’s poll numbers after he was caught on camera declaring that 47% of the American public “are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims. … These are people who pay no income tax. … and so my job is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”
This too was caught on hidden camera and was disseminated to all of the major news networks, no?
That said, the downside of Hating Breitbart comes when it attempts to castigate mainstream media by acting like mainstream media. Breitbart, noting that he has only two modes “jocularity” and “righteous indignation” is no calmer than an MSNBC of Fox News demagogue, and the clever cutting throughout the film – at one point using a photo of President Obama standing with John Podesta, whom Breitabart calls an “an enemy” and “mortal nemesis,” – is eerily reminiscent to the sly excerpts and cunning editing jobs that Breitbart and his crew rail against.
Tossed about are quotes from Thomas Jefferson and Malcolm X – in an attempt to further show that the Tea Party is not racist – that highlight the potential nefariousness of media, but the documentary itself is often a weapon divined by that same mainstream media.