America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 19 years ago by DrMaddVibe. 15 replies replies.
DAN RATHER APOLOGIZES
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
STATEMENT FROM DAN RATHER:

Last week, amid increasing questions about the authenticity of documents used in support of a 60 MINUTES WEDNESDAY story about President Bush's time in the Texas Air National Guard, CBS News vowed to re-examine the documents in question—and their source—vigorously. And we promised that we would let the American public know what this examination turned up, whatever the outcome.

Now, after extensive additional interviews, I no longer have the confidence in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them journalistically. I find we have been misled on the key question of how our source for the documents came into possession of these papers. That, combined with some of the questions that have been raised in public and in the press, leads me to a point where—if I knew then what I know now—I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question.

But we did use the documents. We made a mistake in judgment, and for that I am sorry. It was an error that was made, however, in good faith and in the spirit of trying to carry on a CBS News tradition of investigative reporting without fear or favoritism.

Please know that nothing is more important to us than people's trust in our ability and our commitment to report fairly and truthfully.

Charlie Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 06-16-2002
Posts: 39,751
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, sounds like a CYA!

Charlie
DrMaddVibe Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,541
Don't worry Dan...we NEVER trusted you anyway!

Don't let the door hit you in the a$$ on the way out!

Shill!
ferd6 Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 10-19-2001
Posts: 1,145
CBS hasnt been the same since Uncle Walt
CWFoster Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 12-12-2003
Posts: 5,414
If he knew then what he knows now? His "evil minions" had interviews (that they CHOSE not to use) with one of his former squadron-mates, interviews (that they also CHOSE not to use) with the alleged authors family who said he a) wouldn't have written a CYA type memo, and B) that he liked and respected Bush. They also CHOSE to run with a preliminary authetication that was simply read over the phone to the authenticator, and that person never actually SAW the documents, that's good enough for a high reliability, isn't it? Enough to drag the Presidents name through some more mud! (at least if he's a Republican!)
snowwolf777 Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 06-03-2000
Posts: 4,082
I guess the "Guns of Autumn" debacle in the 70s, and the Gen. Westmoreland piece where CBS blew it so badly they actually lost their ability to purchase libel/slander insurance coverage, didn't teach them a thing. So $1,000 pinstripe suits at Black Rock can watch their ratings and credibility fall even further.
osage Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 02-18-2001
Posts: 492
Looks like Dan "piece of crap' Rather finally had to admit to his liberal ways. He tried as hard as he could to bring down President Bush and only proved the one thing that was never in doubt. Rather is an A$$hole.
drnos Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 10-29-2003
Posts: 2,787
My interest in this episode is quite apart from the politics. Rather has been put in a rather awkward predicament: Is he a hard-nosed journalist digging for stories, or is he just a news-reading talking head?

IOW, whose mistake is this? The truth is that he could have dodged it by blaming his producer, Ms. Maples. He is, in fact, little more than a talking head. With his time in the business, he does carry more weight than the typical "rip-and-read" anchor. But he really doesn't have the time to dig all this stuff up; that's what his producers are for.

Note his oh-so-carefully worded apology: he flips back and forth between "I" and "we." Until the climax: "
"...I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question. But we did use the documents. We made a mistake in judgment..."

So there it is: he tries to have it both ways. He is the hard-nosed journalist who would not have gone ahead with the story. He would not have used the documents. But WE did and WE made a mistake.

At the end of the day, he would rather be thought of as journalist and take this heat, than to put the blame where it really belongs, on the producers, and escape most of the flak.
osage Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 02-18-2001
Posts: 492
Actually, Dan Rather used the "we" word too much. It should have been I, I, I. He was still not taking responsibility. He and he alone could have said "no I'm not reporting this story." He wanted it to be true so bad that he let it cloud his judgement.
CWFoster Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 12-12-2003
Posts: 5,414
When interviewing The supposed authors widow, they asked her if might have had any papers that he might've kept that would imply that he was being pressured to sugarcoat Bush evals. She TOLD them that if they had any documents like that she would seriously question their origin, because her husband respected Bush, thought highly of him, and didn't type. This was all earlier in the production phase of the show, and if CBS CARED about the truth, that should've been enough to throw up a red flag to investigate more thouroughly.


On a SLIGHTLY related note (going back to Vietnam again, yep) Remember the film clip that won Rather a Pulitzer? He was crouched down behind a bridge abutment, and you could hear the shells going off.....

I knew a friend once who saw him filming that! Right behind the cameraman were a line of troops, walking upright(my buddy was one of them) looking at him wondering why he was acting like he was under direct fire when the actual fighting was five klicks down the road?

Once a fake, always a fake! My biggest dissapointment with Fox News was when they hired Geraldo Rivera!
usahog Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 12-06-1999
Posts: 22,691
NewsMax Poll: Dan Rather Must Resign
Millions of Americans are outraged by CBS News and Dan Rather for their obstinance in admitting they used forged documents to indict the military record of George W. Bush.

In an online survey completed this week, and with more than 100,000 respondents, NewsMax readers overwhelming believe that Dan Rather should resign as anchor for the CBS Evening News.

Mr. Rather's position may have been further weakened when:

a) it was revealed that CBS purposefully withheld from their
'60 Minutes' program forensic experts who said the documents were fraudulent;

b) after it was clear the documents were found to be fraudulent, Rather and Company continued to argue their story was essentially accurate; and

c) one witness, a fellow guardsman during Bush's time in service, was not allowed to appear on the CBS program because he was "too pro Bush."

But the NewsMax poll results show that the American people have not been fooled by CBS. The Tiffany Network's credibility may be completely lost -- unless Dan Rather accepts responsibility and resigns.

Here are the NewsMax Poll Results:

1) Do you believe CBS and Dan Rather used forged documents to make allegations about George Bush's National Guard service?

Yes - 98.27%
No - 1.73%

2) Do you agree with Dan Rather that his story questioning George Bush's service is still true?

Agree - 2.62%
Disagree - 97.38%

3) Should Dan Rather resign over the CBS story that used these questionable documents?

Yes - 94.05%
No - 5.95%

4) Who do you believe most about their account of their military record?

Bush - 87.74%
Kerry - 1.39%
Both - 4.35%
Neither - 6.52%

Please Note:

NewsMax Magazine first reported on the $2 billion media war against George Bush -- find out the details - Go Here Now.

Fair and Balanced
Hog
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
usahog

4) Who do you believe most about their account of their military record?

Bush - 87.74%
Kerry - 1.39%
Both - 4.35%
Neither - 6.52%

87.74% of any group would not believe it will be light tomorrow during the day followed by dark after sunset.

com'on, use a better source for you're stats.
usahog Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 12-06-1999
Posts: 22,691
Rick,

I was one of those who took the servey ;0)~~~

Hog
calavera Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 01-26-2002
Posts: 1,868
Rick,

I have never attacked you personally, and I don't want you to take this as a personal attack. However, I have to say that your unwavering, complete blind hatred of Bush is starting to become grating.

You don't like him. You think that he and his ancestors are a bunch of opportunistic criminals. You think that his wife is a "Stepford Wife". You think that his supporters would blindly follow him off a cliff. We get it.

J
DrMaddVibe Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,541
James P. Pinkerton





September 21, 2004

These are the final days for Dan Rather. But the story of the fake documents aired on "60 Minutes" is deeper than just one man's fall. It is the story of technology's transition-and that's a tale that will never end.

By any fair reckoning, Rather should resign. As a big shot at CBS News-in addition to being anchorman-in-chief, he has been the managing editor of the CBS Evening News since March 1981-he deserves to be held to the same standard as Howell Raines, the executive editor of The New York Times, who was forced to resign last year in the wake of a news-fabrication scandal.

Some might argue that Rather was just a duped news reader, that he was simply following orders. In which case, following the precedent established in the 1998 "Tailwind" scandal-in which CNN's Peter Arnett was forced to quit after he read phony copy about Americans using poison gas in Laos-Rather should still be forced to take his leave.

But even if he limps along at CBS till the expiration of his contract in 2006, Rather is done for. He will be remembered as a reporter-crusader who went chasing after the Big Story both courageously and recklessly. Whatever the subject - hurricanes, Watergate, Afghanistan, George W. Bush - he was always on a quest. And like Captain Ahab, the obsessive anti-hero of Moby-******, Rather had many successes, but then he went harpooning after one too many a whale.

But if whaling provided drama in the 19th century, the big events of that era were elsewhere. The major purpose of whaling was to bring home lubricants and fuel. But whales as the source were soon displaced by petroleum; the modern industrial economy was born.

And so today, when Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, speaks of "the end of the era of network news," his reference is far more broad than just one man, or one scandal. He is speaking of the rise of cable news; Fox, actually beat out the broadcast networks during the Republican convention earlier this month.

In fact, cable of all kinds has been eating away at the traditional oligopoly of VHF channels 2-13 for a couple decades now. Whereas once the few UHF channels were a hard-to-reach province of snowy re-runs, today hundreds of cable channels are as clear and reachable as anything on broadcast.

So the "de-massification" of the media has been ongoing-and will keep going. In the '90s, Internet-based news-most notably the Drudge Report, which burst on the scene in 1998 by breaking the Monica Lewinsky story-proved that the "new media" could blow past older media. And now we have even newer media: the bloggers, the folks at home in their pajamas who collectively broke the "Rathergate" story.

The two key concepts in this never-ending techno-saga are the increasing ubiquity of Internet-based technology and the decreasing barriers to entry into a public forum. That is, anybody with a computer and a modem can be a blogger, and any blogger can be a media-player.

So what comes next? The past tells us that techno-change is tectonic change. Prior to the 15th century, the Catholic Church maintained its monopoly in part by controlling Bible production. Bibles were not only scarce but were hand-scribed in Latin, which only priests could read.

Then came Johannes Gutenberg, who used movable type to mass-print Bibles, eventually in local languages. Soon ordinary folk were reading the Bible for themselves and thinking for themselves. Protestantism was born. What followed was a century of religious war, but the world was transformed. One of those transformations was the radical new reality that technology would continue shaping events.

So today, Rathergate is just so much foam on the surface. The deep current of our time is that the old networks have lost their power to a bunch of scruffy no-names. Techno-change is shaping history yet again.
Copyright © 2004, Newsday, Inc.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,541
See the tie-in Rick? Finish with Postman's book yet?
Users browsing this topic
Guest