Dan Rather's Day of Reckoning: It didn't start with Rathergate. (Highly recommended!)

The Weekly Standard ^ | October 4, 2004 | John Podhoretz

[tet68]

Bump. Must read!

[Starboard]

You would probably find Bernard Goldberg's books, Bias and Arrogance, enlightening (and enjoyable reading). Goldberg used to work at CBS (he was fired) and gets in plenty of shots at his old colleague Rather.

[Anti-Bubba182]

Rather has every shot comming!

Podhoretz brings up an interesting tidbit from the past:

"..The iconic status of The Selling of the Pentagon in media circles, which was instantaneous, was certainly helped along by its bald and unapologetic hostility to the display of American military power in any form, as evidenced by Mudd's concluding words. But even more so, it was due to the network's defiance of a House committee's subpoena of the documentary's outtakes and other reporting.

A Democratic congressman from Louisiana named F. Edward Hebert, then chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, supplied some footage to Davis and his team of an interview he had filmed with a former Vietnam POW. Davis told Hebert's press secretary "the videotape would be used for a POW special on CBS." Outraged to have been used by CBS to aid its case that the Pentagon was improperly marketing itself, Hebert went on the attack. CBS re-aired the show a few days later with 20 minutes of responses after the airing by Hebert and others--followed by a rebuttal by CBS News president Richard S. Salant, who said pointedly on the air that "no one has refuted the essential accuracy" of the show.

If you want to know where Rather got the idea of saying, "Those who have criticized aspects of our story have never criticized the major thrust of our report," look no further..."

Podhoretz examines how each successive scandal is handled by CBS with less effectiveness and more damage to the network. They are facing the problem in the same old way with less influence and power than in the past. Also the rest of MSM is not behind them. CBS is taking a shellacing. Even the friendly voices are also critical ones.

[Mia T]

Dan Rather is still trying this trick, asserting that "anybody who knows me knows that I am not politically motivated, not politically active for Democrats or Republicans, and that I'm independent." But it no longer matters much what he may or may not say. He has destroyed himself and his news organization not because he is biased--which of course he is--but because his bias blinded him to the obvious truth that the memos he and his team believed (and/or desperately hoped) might help derail the reelection bid of George W. Bush were fabricated. They believed this because they wanted to believe it.

Dan Rather's Day of Reckoning
From the October 4, 2004 issue: It didn't start with Rathergate.
by John Podhoretz
10/04/2004, Volume 010, Issue 04

A bit of circular reasoning here.

Podhoretz's premise, that Rather wouldn't engage in the fraud knowingly or at least consciously -- (the latter option defies common scence and is a bit too New-Age-y for my sensibilities, in any case) -- is something presumably left for a possible conclusion.

RATHERGATE IS ANOTHER WATERGATE: The Nexus
So where are the grand juries, special prosecutors + indictments, anyway? (HEY! Where are the calls for them?)^{(computer-generated superscript) BUMP}

 

 

(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)

NEW! compleatjohnkerry.blogspot.com

NEW! unfitforcommand.blogspot.com

johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com
 

[Mia T]

oops
sense :)