Posted on 09/26/2005 8:44:49 PM PDT by RatherBiased.com
In a televised interview with former CBSer Marvin Kalb, retired CBS anchor Dan Rather stated that his network will not allow him to continue to pursue the story of President Bush's Air Guard service.
"Straight-up, no chaser, no," the exiled anchor said when asked if he would consider filing a story about it on the "60 Minutes" news magazine since he continues to believe in it.
"CBS News doesn't want me to do that story. They wouldn't let me do that story," Rather said, declining to elaborate further. (See it in WMV or RealMedia video.)
Rather also expressed suspicion about bloggers' role in publicizing CBS's mistakes in the whole Memogate affair.
"There are some strange, and to me, still mysterious things, certainly unexplained things that happened about how it got attacked and why, even before the program was over," Rather said, adding that his network was derelict in not "knowing enough of how quickly bloggers could strike."
The anchor appeared to have softened his attitudes toward some (unamed) web authors but remained suspicious about "those bloggers who were partisan politically affiliated and/or had ideological axe to grind with us" in the exposition of the document scandal.
Asked about his long-time fascination with the word courage, Rather said it was his father's favorite word and also one of his own, adding that "Sometimes saying it, giv[es] me my best chance to mount maybe just a wee, small part of it."
Full transcript here.
Denial just ain't a river in Egypt.
I like this better...
Sometimes saying it, giv[es] me my best chance to mount (Mrs Rather) with my wee, small part.
One part of the transcript that may interest folks here:
MARVIN KALB: People react to journalists in a different way. I mean, for example, let me jump ahead weeks are discussing differences between, in a way, old media and new media, and we're very much old media.
DAN RATHER: You are Marvin, of course. I am not out there on the cutting edge of new media as you well know.
KALB: Every now and then it even looks as if the new media is at war with the old media. I want to go back to the National Guard story of last year. It was the blogger, the internet blogger who instantly went after you and CBS with an effect that was very damaging all the way around. And played an impact, indeed, on the presidential campaign.
I have always been astonished that even before the program ended, it was still on. A blog site called FreeRepublic.com run by an active air force officer blasted the program. Four hours later, another website called Buckhead ran a detailed critique of the document that you used in the report.
Now, I have always wondered to myself. That's an amazingly swift bit of research. You watch something on air, four hours later, you are prepared to run pages and pages of detailed criticism of the document. How does somebody do that that quickly?
Now, the Los Angeles Times identified Buckhead as a Republican lawyer in Atlanta named harry McDougal. I don't know if that's true. What happened then was dozens of other bloggers joined in. Then the mainstream media joined in, and then everything shifted, and the focus was on you, the focus was not on the substance of your story. The national guard aspect of the whole thing sort of dropped to the side and this media focus was on you. [...]
DAN RATHER: One of the things I learned about the bloggers... is not to overgeneralize about bloggers in going down the list of things that happened to us. And, yes, there are some strange, and to me, still mysterious things, certainly unexplained things that happened about how it got attacked and why, even before the program was over. But I try not to bog down on it. What I learned is there are bloggers who have as much integrity as I or the most integrity-filled people I know have, and who feel that it's their mission in life to ask questions and keep on asking questions.
There are other bloggers, and I'll go ahead and say it, that some of the quote, "mainstream press" seemed to take, if not delight in our dilemma, uh, they picked up pretty quickly on those bloggers who were partisan politically affiliated and/or had ideological axe to grind with us.
And instead of saying, well they've raised these questions, for example, about the documents, are these questions true? Next thing I know, they were in mainstream newspapers, and away it went.
Dan Rather's legacy hinges on whether or not he can get the public to accept his assertions as fact.
> ... his network will not allow him to continue to
> pursue the story of President Bush's Air Guard service.
And that's because:
a. There's no "there" there on the actual Bush story, but,
b. there is lots to learn about who authored the fake
memos, and their chain of custody to CBS.
CBS likely alredy has full details on (b), but for them
to reveal it on air would require a "courage" they lack.
And that's the way it is.
Maybe some unfortunate Katirna victims would still be alive.
BUAHAHAHAH! Could they have screwed up this anymore? Clearly the Old Media can't even get BASIC FACTS from the New Media. I mean, this is Reporting 101. Or 099.
Ping -
DAN RATHER: One of the things I learned about the bloggers... is not to overgeneralize about bloggers in going down the list of things that happened to us. And, yes, there are some strange, and to me, still mysterious things, certainly unexplained things that happened about how it got attacked and why, even before the program was over. But I try not to bog down on it. What I learned is there are bloggers who have as much integrity as I or the most integrity-filled people I know have, and who feel that it's their mission in life to ask questions and keep on asking questions.
There are other bloggers, and I'll go ahead and say it, that some of the quote, "mainstream press" seemed to take, if not delight in our dilemma, uh, they picked up pretty quickly on those bloggers who were partisan politically affiliated and/or had ideological axe to grind with us.
And instead of saying, well they've raised these questions, for example, about the documents, are these questions true? Next thing I know, they were in mainstream newspapers, and away it went.
CBS News doesn't want me to do that story
PING
Either way is fine with me. It couldn't happen to a finer bunch of "journalists."
Congressman Billybob
Latest column: "The 'Hard Bigotry' of Incompetence at the NY Times"
But there is no excuse for Marvin Kalb to get HIS facts wrong. Reports of falsified documents did not begin "while the show was on." That confusion came from a failure of early reporters to pay attention to the difference between Pacific Time and Eastern Time.
Of course, there was no website known as Buckhead. And by the end of day two, enough experts on printed, typed and computer-generated documents had cropped up (of ALL political persuasions), that it was clear that the Rather documents were a) a fraud and b) CBS had amply reason to know that BEFORE the broadcast, if Rather and his team had been competent and honest journalists.
Kalb might as well interview Billyjeff Clinton for a denial that he did the nasty with Monica Lewinski. That cat is out of the bag. That dog won't hunt. And the same goes for Rather's so-called Texas Air National Guard story.
Congressman Billybob
Latest column: "The 'Hard Bigotry' of Incompetence at the NY Times"
Hahahahahahahahhaahhahhahhaaha!
The next question should have been, "tell me, Dan, what is a false question"?
Even as the giant creatures sank towards oblivion, some found a moment to ponder, in a vague, uncomprehending manner, the nature of the stickily enveloping puddles that drew them inexorably down.
The clueless and the deranged, on public exhibition. A freak show.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.