Opinion: Rather's memo of mass distraction

Lenawee Connection ^ | 9/19/2004 | Dave Clark

[chasio649]

Daily Telegram Editor in Chief

MEMO TO: Dan Rather

SUBJECT: "Rathergate"

Tough week, huh, Dan? Newspaper editors and reporters make mistakes too. Heck, this week we reran a traffic accident brief on the front page Friday because we screwed it up earlier in the week. We didn't do that because we were threatened, or to clear our names -- we did it because it was the best way to help this person correct the public record.

Compared to your National Guard memo-mixup, that was nothing.

I grimaced as I watched you sitting with Marian Carr Knox, the former secretary of President Bush's late squadron commander, Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian, on "60 Minutes II" on Wednesday. You had the manner of a lion that had been backed into the corner of its cage: desperate, on the verge of lashing out against your antagonists.

It's the first time I've seen an interviewer more defensive than his or her subject. Inside, I'm sure you were quietly appalled that you were being challenged by those people in the media and the Internet bloggers (Media scum!).

But who can blame you for being upset.

First, people debunk the documents you still meekly claim are accurate.

Second, people attack you personally for rushing to the air with this story without covering all your bases (you have to admit, that was pretty sloppy for a guy who has been a CBS News anchor for nearly 25 years).

Judging by your expression during Wednesday's broadcast, I would imagine you think this savage attack on your reputation has just appeared from out of the blue, just like that 1986 attack on your physical person did. You've had to deflect so many shots this week I bet you're half expecting that "What's the frequency, Kenneth?" guy to come out of nowhere and knock you upside the head again.

But you deserve this public flogging, pal.

All you have left of your exclusive is Knox, a crabby old lady who seems to be harboring a decades-old grudge against the president. Knox -- who also said the document appears to be fake -- claims that she typed a memo "similar" to the one you featured in your piece. But she gave you all she could -- Killian was very upset that Bush ignored orders. She said his fellow Guardsmen didn't like the "Fortunate Son" either. And that Killian and other officers would ''snicker about what (Bush) was getting away with.''

If people were taking you at your word these days that might be ... something. Of course, her distaste for Bush was also obvious in the interview. First she pointed out that Bush always called her by the wrong name to make him appear stupid (but she did say he was always a "gentleman").

While distancing yourself from the documents, you tried to stand firm Wednesday: The memo may be a fake ... but no one has disputed the claim that Bush received preferential treatment to get into the National Guard and didn't fulfill his requirements.

Here is the thing, Dan: Without any real document that begins to defend the charges leveled against Bush, there isn't any story, is there?

This week you told Howard Kurtz at The Washington Post that you would like to "break" your own correction.

''If the documents are not what we were led to believe, I'd like to break that story,'' you said. ''Any time I'm wrong, I want to be right out front and say, 'Folks, this is what went wrong and how it went wrong.' ''

Hopefully this drama will serve as a cautionary tale to young journalists. Obviously you haven't learned a darn thing, Dan.

You see, it's not about you. It's not about getting the story first (at the expense of getting the story right). It's not about creating nonevents to further distract voters from the issues in this election.

It's about serving the people you work for -- the public. It's about getting people the correct information so they can cast an educated vote in November. That's what journalism is about.

In the heat of this election cycle, you haven't forgotten that, have you Dan?

[Fixit]

The logo that makes itself.