Huffington Post v. Breitbart: First Take Roundup

Even the headlines tell the story. This makes The Huffington Post look very bad. And that thing I’ve been thinking lately about liberal bias and hatred of free speech? Case closed.

The stupid saga of Andrew Breitbart and the Huffington Post

says Salon’s Alex Pareene, who really seems to hate Breitbart. Still, Arianna gets it even worse…

Complaining about the Huffington Post publishing awful, offensive garbage seldom works, because some of that garbage is profitable and some of it is just stuff that Arianna herself seems to like. And Huffington herself is too busy spending big bucks bringing big names to AOL/HuffPo while shuttering dozens of existing titles and letting various less impressive content-providers go to care if a bunch of liberals are mad at her site.

But! Breitbart then apparently went too far when he said a bunch of stupid and offensive things about Van Jones in an interview with the Daily Caller. And Arianna is actually quite close to the former White House "green jobs czar."

HuffPo Caves To Liberal Pressure, Removes Andrew Breitbart From Front Page

says Mediaite’s Frances Martel…

Looks like the golden era of bipartisanship at theHuffington Post has ended, no more than two weeks after it started.

Huffington Post Wimps Out on Breitbart

Slate’s Dave Weigel, ask…

Is the Huffington Post’s standard that contributors can be to some modified limited hang-out if they use ad hominems in other forums? Boy, good thing Breitbart doesn’t have an army of contributors who can comb HuffPo authors’ published and spoken work to see if they’ve done that.

Breitbart banned from front page of Huffington Post for ‘ad hominem’ attacks despite HuffPo history of printing ad hominem attacks

The Daily Caller’s Steven Nelson wins for longest headline and reports..

Breitbart is far from the first prominently featured contributor to The Huffington Post that has made ad hominem attacks (though unlike others who had their ad hominem attacks published in posts on The Huffington Post, Breitbart’s comments were not made in posts on the site).


The Daily Caller’s Mickey Kaus wins for shortest headline and reports..

If this rule is applied honestly, I suspect a whole lot of people are now banned from HuffPo’s front page.


  1. HuffPo has managed to “jump the shark” even before completing the deal with AOL.
    AOL has got to be asking themselves … just what they are buying ?

  2. Yes. Thank Jeebus you are not at HuffPo anymore and therefore will not be tainted by them.

    How fortunate for you that you have landed at well-respected and admired Big Journalism.

  3. First off, you appear to be quite ignorant of Arianna Huffington’s history. I would point you to her former husband and her connections in California politics; she hangs out with leftists like Arnold Schwarzenegger, and always has. She’s no leftist, nor even much of a liberal; she is and has always been an opportunist.

    Second, you are delusional if you think Breitbart is not racist. He gave O’Keefe a megaphone for slandering ACORN and Sherrod–and if you don’t see a racial angle in a white kid dressing up like a Hallowe’en version of Dolemite or the dicing and slicing of Shirley Sherrod’s speech, you’re simply making excuses for Breitbart.

    Finally, “censorship”? Breitbart’ s got not one, but several sites where he can spread his toxic bullshit. Have you not heard of Big Government, Big Hollywood, and the rest of the family of Big sites (kinda Freudian, but whatever floats yer boat…)? If you’re so very interested in the free exchange of ideas, perhaps you could suggest to your patron that he open up an equal time portion to one or all of his sites. I don’t think Breitbart is having the least bit of trouble getting his message out, your hyperventilations to the contrary.

  4. Lee, you may want to change your sidebar; “…get the latest information on my work including my pieces on The Huffington Post,…”

    And welcome to the open, truthful, more respectful “dark side” LOL

    I say that fully aware that I have many friends on the left who are great people and do not hold or express the views that so many have online. Just online seems to be a seething cauldron of hate and hositility towards everything many of the TEA party/right/conservatives say. Left out the Republicans for a reason as I’m not sure where they are these days… stopped supporting them about the time Bush passed the Drug bill.

  5. Is it possible this was Breitbart’s plan all along? Breitbart is on par with the devil incarnate to most at Huffington Post, more so than Chenney even.

    He seems to have a knack for reversing his fortunes in a split second and making his attackers look like complete fools when everyone is paying the most amount of attention. Although most people that have paid attention to the left long enough know how predictable they are and that almost doesn’t make it fair.

    I think Huffpo really wanted to court the Conservative crowd because AOL isn’t just a community of the left leaning variety. Unfortunately their first foray into those dangerous waters was a disaster. Not just a disaster they had to one up themselves and show the world just how dishonest they actually are. They are either going to have to disavow many of their posters or their going to have to rework some of their “rules.”

    Breitbart’s motto should be, “don’t throw me in the brier patch.”

    Breitbart – 5 (Acorn*, Pigford, Racism Charges, NPR*, ‘Huffpocracy’)**
    Huffington Post – 0

    * O’Keefe exposé but Breitbart gets credit for reporting them and defending them.
    ** Quick list off the top of my head.

  6. You know what makes the Huffington Post look bad? Hiring a clown like Andrew Breitbart in the first place. From his celebration of James O’Keefe’s splicings to his peddling of the wildly dishonest Sherrod video, Breitbart continually shows that he really doesn’t care for the truth.

    By the way, do you really think quoting Mickey Kaus *helps* your argument? That’s a man who’s been wrong just slightly less often than Bill Kristol.

  7. Welcome to Breitbart’s Jiu jitsu Academy. We hope you will enjoy the experience.

  8. While I do think Arianna/HuffPo blew this thing, I’m not at all down with the “free speech” meme that Breitbart and those who support him/are ideologically opposed to the “liberal/lamestream” media (real or imagined) are trying to sell.

    In the simplest terms, since when does free speech include an entitlement to the feature position on someone else’s media outlet? Free speech isn’t absolute, especially where privately owned/operated media is concerned. While you have every legal andethical right to speak, you don’t have any legal or ethical right to do your speaking on my blog, (or anyone else’s, aside your own) unless I (they) give it to you. And I (they) have every legal right to grant permission or to withhold/take it away, for any reason I choose, or even none at all. (And while one can certainly judge the ethics of my doing so, one cannot legitimately claim any free speech entitlement to my blog space. There is no such entitlement.)

    Arianna screwed up because she went back on her word, and because it’s pretty apparent that she and the HuffPo team are not being forthright as to the reason why. Whether it was the pressure of those libs who didn’t want Breitbart on the front page, or Arianna taking sides in a dispute between two folks she sees as friends, I dont know. But I’m pretty sure it wasn’t the Louie-like feigned shock of discovering that Andrew Breitbart was capeable of ad hominem attack, or that such attack was unique to this particular featured author. Had she honestly said she was giving in to the wishes of her loyal readership, or was offended by what her friend Andrew said about her friend Van (whichever or whatever was the real reason), I’d be much more supportive of Arianna/HuffPo. (And while I’m not happy with the means, I am happy with the end; my feeling from the start was that Andrew has his own dang blogs, and doesn’t deserve the increased exposure as a featured author elsewhere… especially not an elsewhere so often deemed the enemy (which is to say, not conservative) by the likely Breitbart audience. Obviously, Arianna didn’t get my memo, and was willing to give him that exposure… until she wasn’t.)

    Andrew Breitbart is still free to speak. In fact, he’s even still free to speak at HuffPo, should he wish to avail himself of the privilege. To me, the idea that a guy who can still blog on someone else’s site-but not on the front page-is whining about a loss of free speech, and that so many are echoing him, just seems like partisanship for the sake of partisanship. Andrew’s speech is as free as it ever was.

    The speech is free. The venue and the audience, often has a price. In this case it was a little personal respect for a friend of a friend, or remembering that you’re a guest at Arianna’s virtual house, and that, while she wants to be hospitable, she also has an obligation to keep her longtime/loyal audience happy.

  9. DocAmazing and DiTurno,

    Thank you. Please keep it up. As someone noted recently — Rule of thumb: Liberals want conservatives to shut up, and conservatives want liberals to keep talking.

  10. I deleted the HuffPo app from my iphone. No need to read their site if it’s a bunch of censored nonsense. They make money on site hits, and my eyes are elsewhere…

    Cheers, Lee.

  11. You really see something in the way of “shut up” in those two comments, stan…? Cause I sure don’t.

    I mean, you might not agree with ’em, but they’re not saying much of anything different about AB than folks here are saying about liberals (liberals other than Lee Stranahan, of course.) Both of ’em believe Breitbart is dishonest, and DocAmazing is disputing the “liberal” history of Arianna Huffington, even post-hubby. The racist charge is questionable–though I too think O’Keefe’s pimp bit was kinda exploitive, though I don’t see how that’s Andrew’s fault. And his final point is the same as mine; It’s not a free speech or censorship issue when we’re talking about a privately owned/operated blog that he has no claim to. (And that’s to say nothing of the fact that Andrew Breitbart CAN still blog at the Huffington Post; His post just won’t appear on the coveted front page.)

    The way I see it, pointing these things out invites discussion of their facts and opinions, rather than preventing or precluding it.

    So, while it’s a humorous aphorism, it doesn’t seem germane to the situation to which you’re applying it. Nowhere in their comments do I see anything suggesting that anyone shut up.

  12. First of all, this bruhaha is merely a form of advertising. Secondly, there is no such thing as free speech unless you’re standing on a soap box on the village green spouting off to anyone passing by who decides to listen or talking to yourself in front of a mirror. Speech costs money. Maintaining a blog, publishing a paper or magazine, a broadcasting station, and so forth all have a price tag. It costs me money to post this message (I didn’t steal my computer or my dsl line). What is free is choosing not to listen.

    “The way I see it, pointing these things out invites discussion of their facts and opinions, rather than preventing or precluding it.”

    The more the merrier.

    “Welcome to Breitbart’s Jiu jitsu Academy. We hope you will enjoy the experience.”

    Nice one!

  13. While I don’t care one way or the other about Breitbart or the Huffington Post, though I have yet to wrap my mind around why AOL dropped so much change on it, when the whole internet news paradigm is one of migrating from source to source to source and paying for none of it if possible; that her members didn’t abandon her and her “corporate masters” immediately for having done so reminds me of my older brother, member of just about left cause he can find, but still cashed his checks from Halliburton all the same when he was part of their conglomerate.

    I, however, do find it odd that if the man is removed because of things he said other places, then why keep others on the main page that have done the same thing? Is Breitbart really less inflammatory than Al Sharpton? Really? Here’s a man that’s slandered people in open court, ruining their careers and reputations, for profit and race-baiting…but he’s still on the front page of the HuffPro.

  14. If this rule is applied honestly…

    My logic may be a bit cloudy since it’s been awhile, but I’ll be darned if that isn’t a false antecedent.

  15. I got banned from Huffington Post too. I’m a controversial blogger. Arianna was getting under my skin, so I called her Eurotrash and told her she should go back to Greece. It’s not like I held back. ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha The Huffington Post is a liberal rag of intolerant monkeys



  1. The Huffington Post / AOL Amateur Hour - [...] ig you aren’t familiar with the Huffington Post / Andrew Breitbart story I’d point you to this round up…
  2. Breitbart Not Racist: Color of Change Not Happy - [...] of Change manages to successfully pressure HuffPost to do something unprecedented – make Andrew Breitbart the only person in…

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *