I just did something on Facebook I never thought would happen.
I reposted a link by a far-right conservative GOP activist, Jennifer Gratz.
The link went to a Breitbart article.
And I posted both not out to "show what the crazies are up to this time" but in 100% agreement with them.
The bottom line: ABC News in general, and Brian Ross in particular, just fucked up beyond belief.
Earlier this morning, as joelgp noted in his diary, Brian Ross suggested during a live broadcast that the suspect, James Holmes, may be a "Jim Holmes" who's a member of the Colorado Tea Party.
Well, guess what: Nope, it's not the same guy.
Here's ABC's apology/retraction:
"An earlier ABC News broadcast report suggested that a Jim Holmes of a Colorado Tea Party organization might be the suspect, but that report was incorrect. ABC News and Brian Ross apologize for the mistake, and for disseminating that information before it was properly vetted."
Sorry, guys. That just doesn't cut it.
"James Holmes" is a fairly common name. Hell, there's a guy on Facebook living in Aurora, Colorado with that exact name as well; he happens to be 30 and black, but I'd still be willing to be that he's had to put up with some nasty posts. The guy Brian Ross referred to could've been killed because of that report.
Update: Annnnnnd like clockwork, Breitbart is guilty of doing the same damned thing in return, claiming that the actual shooter is a "registered Democrat" without confirmation. Thanks to Trix for the heads' up.
Granted, they provide more correlating evidence that they have the "right" James Holmes than ABC did, but that still doesn't change the fact that 1. They still don't KNOW it's the right guy and 2. Even if he is a "registered Democrat", what of it?
They made such a big stink (rightly so) earlier today about individuals being responsible for their actions, not generalizing about the tea party, etc etc...but if he's a member of the tens-of=millions-strong Democratic Party, that's significant?
I think that's the fastest "update" I've ever posted that didn't involve a correction of the original story.
A friend of mine on Facebook said it best:
"NPR covered the story in about 45 seconds this morning with ALL the detail that MSNBC and CNN had with their wall-to-wall. That does NOT make it any less poignant, or treat the victims with less dignity, it simply informs the public about one awful thing that happened, and tells them that as details emerge, such as motive, or booby traps, or body counts, the information will be reported. How on earth does anything more than that serve any purpose but commercialism, which in a way is even more ghoulish than the crime?"