posted this on the other Nightline thread also.....
Here's Ted's final statement:
"One of our own producers this morning raised a question that I suspect a number of you may have on your mind. ‘Why, just when the presidential candidates are starting to focus on real, substantive issues - devote yet another program to what John Kerry did or didn't do in Vietnam?’ Here's why. Questions have been raised about John Kerry's character and honesty. We were offered the chance to set the record straight on one discrete chapter in Mr. Kerry's war record. We didn't know what we were going to find when our crew went into Vietnam. You have the right to expect that we would have reported it either way. And we would. Because not reporting something you know can be just as much of a political statement – as reporting it. Imagine how outraged supporters of Mr. Kerry would’ve been if we had concealed what we found. Our interviews don’t prove that John Kerry deserved his Silver Star, but they are consistent with the After Action Report and his Citation for Bravery. Finally, once we’ve checked things as thoroughly as we can, we’re in the business of reporting what we learned – not concealing it.”
Some observations:
1) How far has the mainstream media sunk when they have to plead with their viewership (what's left of it), that their program that night wasn't a hack job?
2) Are we really supposed to think that if this would have backed up the vets it would've run? As far as that goes - I'd say it was pretty safe to assume that was never going to happen the way they handled this.
3) Can we just go ahead and close the doors at CBS and ABC news now?
4) Finally, does Ted really think that "having a chance to set the record straight (ie - save our boy)" is a legitimate reason for a news story. As O'Neill pointed out, why not check with all of the surviving vets in this country - and all of the available documentation, instead of going on a fishing expedition to Vietnam?
Did Koppel ask why Kerry hasn't signed SF 180?