Many are calling the shoddy treatment of former Agriculture Department official Shirley Sherrod just the latest teachable moment about race relations. The emphasis on race is off-point.

The abuse of Sherrod by her previous employer, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, the Obama administration and the right-wing media is more significant as the latest lamentable incident in our increasingly polarized media-political culture. The story is a case study in how new-media journalism -- and we use the term loosely -- too often rushes to judgment, abandoning traditional reporting standards in the race for traffic and viewers.

The Sherrod affair was an irresponsible, cooked-up caper, mostly instigated by blogger Andrew Breitbart, known by many for his ubiquitous presence on the highly visited and influential Drudge Report website. By posting edited video, Breitbart painted Sherrod as a racist who seemed unmoved by the troubles of a white farm couple and their requests for help. (In fact, Sherrod -- whose father was killed in 1965 by white men who were never indicted -- helped the couple find a lawyer and save their farm.)

Without contacting Sherrod or, apparently, doing any degree of independent reporting, Fox News amplified Breitbart's distorted story line for its millions of viewers, with Bill O'Reilly provoking his program's opening segment by asking, "Is there racism in the Department of Agriculture?" then calling for Sherrod to resign. Sean Hannity's show followed, with replays of the video and the announcement that Sherrod had resigned, conflating the story with the recent tempest involving the Tea Party movement and the NAACP.

But perhaps it was Glenn Beck, Fox's rising star, who really intimidated Vilsack and the White House. Sherrod later said that Vilsack's undersecretary, Cheryl Cook, harassed her into resigning, telling her: "You're going to be on Glenn Beck tonight."

Next up were the radio and Internet media echo chambers, whose business models also involve inflaming passions, raising ratings and fattening wallets.

The left, of course, can play the same game. Partisan MSNBC hosts like Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow set the television template during the George W. Bush administration, and rival radio outlets and websites similarly stoke political brushfires that provide a lot of heat but very little light on what really matters to most Americans. CNN, despite its straight-news marketing mantra, is jumping into this crooked game as well with its hiring of a former New York governor, the disgraced Eliot Spitzer, to host a new talk show.

Breaking out of this destructive cycle will be difficult -- maybe impossible. True, O'Reilly apologized for "not doing my homework, not putting her remarks in the proper context," and O'Reilly's colleague, Shepard Smith, criticized his network's involvement, saying his "Studio B" program did not run the edited clip because "we did not and do not trust the source." But partisan programs will continue, since they're a lot easier to produce -- and more profitable -- than real reporting.

News consumers will end up making the choice, and there are plenty of credible alternatives in the mainstream media. This week the Washington Post, in a Pulitzer-worthy series "Top Secret America," described the almost unbelievable growth of the U.S. intelligence infrastructure. We could point to other recent examples of deep and important public-service reporting from PBS, National Public Radio, the Wall Street Journal and the Star Tribune. Despite their flaws, these and other mainstream news media organizations are in business to produce print, broadcast and online journalism that is reported and edited by professionals who adhere to journalistic standards.

Skilled bloggers have a role in advancing the news narrative or prodding the press to address topics that are undeniably underplayed. But due to their resources and agendas, they're best used to augment, not replace, traditional news gathering.

And while contrition like that from O'Reilly -- as well as official apologies from President Obama, Vilsack and others -- are necessary and welcome, the partisan media will soon enough revert to form. And the Obama administration will absurdly obsess about it. There's little we can do to change that.

But we can change our own media menus and mitigate the political and societal impact of partisan media's desire to distort by paying more attention to those sources whose intent is to accurately and fairly inform and enlighten.