In an interview with CBS’ Early Show, former Agriculture Department official Shirley Sherrod said she would consider legal action against Andrew Breitbart, a blogger who posted an excerpt of the video clip leading to Ms. Sherrod’s firing.
The Clip Versus the Full Video
The video features Ms. Sherrod speech at the March 27 NAACP 20th Annual Freedom Fund Banquet. The clip posted by Mr. Breitbart suggests that Ms. Sherrod, who is an African-American woman, denied assistance to a white farmer who was about to lose his farm. The full version of the video shows that Ms. Sherrod actually helped the farmer save his farm and that Mr. Breitbart’s clip was taken out of context.
You can view the edited clip and the full version of Shirley Sherrod’s speech here.
Likely No Defamation Claim; But Maybe False Light Claim
While Ms. Sherrod may not have a good defamation claim against Mr. Breitbart, she might have a good false light claim.
Defamation. You defame someone when you make a false statement about the person and the statement harms the person’s reputation. Mr. Breitbart distributed a clip from a presentation given by Ms. Sherrod. That’s unlikely to qualify as a false statement for defamation purposes if the words heard in the clip are words actually spoken by Ms. Sherrod.
False Light. False light may be the better claim for Ms. Sherrod. You commit false light invasion of privacy when you publish information about a person which – although the information may be true on the surface – creates an inaccurate impression of the person. False light claims result from “half truths” when producers embellish a story or use a statement or photograph out of context.
As a public official, Ms. Sherrod might also be required to show that Mr. Breitbart acted with actual malice when placing her in a false light. Actual malice exists if Mr. Breitbart realized or should have realized that his presentation of the clip created an inaccurate impression of Ms. Sherrod.