  |
 |
| |
|
|
 Rather Bites the Hand That Stabbed HimPosted on Sep 23, 2007WASHINGTON—You’ve heard about Dan Rather’s $70 million lawsuit against his former bosses at CBS, and you’re perplexed. I can almost hear you telling one another, just as Rather once told the nation, “We don’t know whether to wind a watch or bark at the moon.” Well, after reading the court papers (and dusting off a couple of appropriate Ratherisms), I think you can safely “bet the double-wide” that the money is less important to Rather than the sight of certain network executives “standing up like they got stuck with hat pins.” And he might well get his way. It’s too easy to dismiss Rather’s they-done-me-wrong lawsuit, filed last week in New York, as nothing more than a bitter parting shot from a legendary broadcaster whose Emmy-winning, Peabody-winning, everything-winning career with CBS ended under a cloud. Make no mistake, he does intend to settle a few scores. But I hope the brass at CBS and its parent company, Viacom, aren’t dismissing his lawsuit as a mere tantrum. That would be a mistake. Rather’s suit gives his account of how he came to report on the since-discontinued “60 Minutes II” that a young George W. Bush not only relied on political connections to get into the Texas Air National Guard—which allowed him to avoid serving in Vietnam—but also got special treatment while he served. Bush escaped punishment for infractions and indiscipline that could have landed a less well-connected guardsman in the brig, the story said. The story was based in part on a batch of Nixon-era documents. When Internet bloggers noticed that the documents didn’t look as if they had been produced by Nixon-era technology—that in fact they looked as if they might have been written using Microsoft Word software—the story, and Rather’s career, started to fall apart. After the story was questioned, Rather steadfastly defended it on the air, refusing to give an inch. In the suit, he says he was ordered to take that combative posture by Andrew Heyward, who was then president of CBS News—and who had taken personal responsibility for vetting the story before it aired, according to Rather’s account. Rather says he was so busy with other assignments that he had little to do with reporting the story. This doesn’t fit the globetrotting-gumshoe image that network anchors like to project, but it’s the reality of TV news—high-priced talent is stretched way too thin to get bogged down in the details of every story. The suit says that Rather still believes the documents are probably genuine. I’m not sure about that—come on, Dan, they’re “shakier than cafeteria Jell-O”—but I do think he makes a valid argument about the larger issue: The point of the story, that Bush got kid-gloves treatment while he was avoiding Vietnam in the Air National Guard, didn’t rest entirely on the disputed documents. But CBS never tried to defend the story’s central thrust. The network backed off, ordered Rather to apologize on-air, eventually fired him as anchor of the “CBS Evening News,” restricted his airtime on “60 Minutes,” and finally let his contract expire. Rather says he offered to hire a private investigator to do more reporting on the story. CBS hired its own investigator, the suit says, but ignored his findings that the documents “were most likely authentic, and that the underlying story was certainly accurate.” Why did CBS back off? Rather contends it was because Sumner Redstone, chairman of Viacom, wanted to avoid being at loggerheads with the Bush administration. Stories critical of the administration, such as the Abu Ghraib scandal—which Rather broke on “60 Minutes II”—got unusual attention from nervous higher-ups, Rather’s suit says. Anyone could use an extra $70 million, but Dan Rather needs it less than most of us; his base salary at CBS was $6 million a year. What he’s really doing with his headline-grabbing lawsuit, aside from calling out some former bosses and colleagues who he believes betrayed him, is making a point about the relationship between journalism and government—and how and why that relationship has changed. The point is that when the next set of Pentagon Papers comes down the pike, how will our corporatized news media react? If such documents happened to be delivered into the hands of CBS News, would Redstone do what the Sulzbergers of The New York Times and the Grahams of The Washington Post did back in the early 1970s? Would he put everything he owns at risk, in service of the public’s right to know?
That hope is “as thin as November ice,” Rather would say. Or maybe “as thin as turnip soup.” Take your pick.
© 2007, Washington Post Writers Group
Previous item: Hillary Clinton Takes On Healthcare (Again) Next item: With Big Ideas Like These... Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig.
By JM, September 25, 2007 at 6:44 am # I appreciate your thoughts on this interesting development in the saga that never seems to end, and the Dan Ratherisms that you have scattered about your piece. I certainly agree with the point that you made towards the end about government and media being too buddy buddy. However at the same time, is it not the responsibility of news producers and managing editors to determine what material is salacious and what is groundbreaking? Of course what Rather had reported on seemed somewhat groundbreaking, but at the same time it was well known that Bush, and Vice President Cheney, had not served in the military. It then seemed that CBS was just reproducing previous information, trying to make a campaign issue. I also found it interesting that you said “how will our corporatized news media react?” But has the news media not reported important topics like Mark Foley, the DC Madam and Walter Reed medical hospital. All of which involved very high profile political figures in some way, shape or form. However, I do see the skepticism you have, as I certainly have had, when reporters are pawns in any political figure’s media strategy, as the lead up to Iraq showed.
By TT, September 25, 2007 at 4:55 am # I’d like to know how Dan expects to get a fair trial. It seems that law makes no difference any more unless it favors the elite. Even though Dan was rich, as you pointed out, he is no match for these judges who are owned and operated by Westinghouse & General Electric( the essence of Dan’s real boss), Exxon, George Bush, Dick Cheney and many others pulling strings behind the scenes with their clean hands.
By zz ziled, September 24, 2007 at 9:47 pm # From across the pond: DAN RATHER: TASED AND CONFUSED
By jake brown, September 24, 2007 at 7:54 pm # For a pittance of 70 mil i expect an out of court settlement. No one testifies and the dirty laundry gets white-washed. Does anyone have other expectations?
By rage, September 24, 2007 at 4:09 pm # GOOD! Anything to get that rat-bastard Les Mooves, bald turd-wad tyrant. These repug-wads may as well face it: Dumya was AWOL and should be under the jail right now for gross dereliction of duty during wartime. That rascal did not serve his country, even though he expects each and everyone else to die for his oil profits. The truth is that no one saw Dumya in uniform once drug testing became mandetory. Few working for corporate media had Dan Rather’s guts to say that out loud though. That numbed skull cokehead mcFlightsuit probably couldn’t pass a drop-test today. He needs to be impeached with the quickness on the grounds of pretentious stupidity alone, especially after that USS Lincoln show. Mission Accomplished! Yeah, right. “We’re kicking ass in Iraq!” I couldn’t beleive he said that crap Down Under. Then the addle brained little idiot didn’t even realize he wasn’t talking to OPEC when he bragged so proudly about his evil mayhem. “Psst - you’re at APEC, sir.” What an utter moron! No Bush has donned a uniform since Poppy left the Navy. Check out all the official BFEE Family photos; no one is in a military uniform. All they do is reap the benefits of oil money gained from the sacrifice of our children. The Bush Twins travel by limo while our kids are stowed in coffins in the cargo hulls of commercial flights, so as not to offend the affluent living passengers returning from Euro Disney or Disney Dubai. For that reason alone, the entire population of the United States of America ought to gather at the White House just to kick chimpy’s AWOL ass. The GSA needs to mail each citizen a ticket offering one literal free kick in Dumya’s well exercised ass as restitution for his going AWOL when the nation needed him to die in Nam, subsequently saving us from this horrific presidency. I’d use precious vacation time and borrow the fare from my credit union to get my good kick in. Go, Big Danny! Get ‘cha paper, Big Dog. I hope CBS has to come deep out the pocket for you, Dog! You told us the truth and deserve to get paid.
By Joe R., September 24, 2007 at 3:52 pm # Dan Rather was a victim of a well run CIA style dis-information operation. Not only did the Fascist get rid of one of the only real reporters left, they probably were able to steal another election away from the Democrats. I hope Rather gets 100 million.
By bking7698, September 24, 2007 at 10:14 am # I couldn’t agree more about the Rove connection. It was, for me also the first thing that came to mind. It is classic Rovian dirty tricks. However, with the complicity of Redstone and CBS, that angle would never even be considered, let alone investigated. Karl Rove is hailed as the “boy genius” and “the architect” when in reality he is nothing more than a cynical, ruthless and unscrupulous regurgitator of Lee Atwater-style vicious media manipulation. Genius? Puhleez!
By Eric L Prentis, September 24, 2007 at 9:54 am # The super corporate ownership of mainstream media outlets, such as Viacom’s ownership of CBS, and the infotainment approach to the news has make the product unbelievable and silly beyond words. Non-news corporations controlling the news have destroyed the news and Americans are no longer listening to them.
By Light the Watchtowers, September 24, 2007 at 7:38 am # I trace the beginning of the problems Prior to Hewitt, television news Today’s network news departments are To turn a profit, the price of add-time
By leftyrite, September 24, 2007 at 4:39 am # It’s interesting. We are conditioned to yawn at the outrageous ineptitude, cowardice, callowness, and sloth of people on the ideological Right, accepting their sleaziness as part of the social landscape. On the other hand, we hold a magnifying glass upon those who would wish for reform. Just look at the controversy over the Move On ad. The New York Times is already willing to bail. Dan Rather has paid for his excellence as a journalist with his nervous system. Of course, he’s right about the general thrust of the Bush military story. Dan’s only real error was that he stayed too long at a corrupt fair.
By PACRAT, September 24, 2007 at 3:59 am # RATHER BE RATHER THAN BE WRONG! I for one am pleased that Rather is sticking to his story about the president’s national guard history - and a trial will eventually trot out the full story!! Bush’s “disappearance” otherwise will continue to be open to speculation. Rather has been around too long to be so easily dismissed by the owners and publishers and republican neocons (not the healthy republicans who also want to know where Bush was while he was awol) who are afraid to clash with the Administration. The neocons still control congress - along with the white house and the supreme court. Can’t anyone break their stranglehold? And if Rather wins and uses the money to improve the sad state of journalism today - winning becomes more than a personal vindication. Maybe Rather can!
By dsmith, September 24, 2007 at 3:30 am # Damn man! You have balls to try to defend Rather and the bogus documents CBS touted as real. The explanation I will never forget went like this,"Well the documents may not be real but we think what they said was real.” Huh? Believe me, I’m no fan of Alfred E. Bush, but I believe Rather and Mapes were trying to throw the election by presenting this smear as documented. We got enough of that with the lead up to the invasion of Iraq.
By thomas billis, September 23, 2007 at 11:11 pm # Mr Robinson why did you not look at the recent past.Did your paper or the New York Times or anybody else but Mcclatchy really serve the public need to know in the run up to war.You all served your corporate masters who in turn served the White House.Mr Robinson you may not wish to remind people of medias complicity in this runup to war which by the way also makes your point but remember this there are many of us out here who will never forget it.
By republicanSScareme, September 23, 2007 at 10:07 pm # Dan Rather is a good man and a good reporter. He owned up to the mistakes he made. He has also pointed out the disaster caused by the corporate media and the new breed of wimpy reporters. America’s right-wing thugs brought him down through ruthless character assination...their stock-in-trade. Despite the controversy over certain documents, the fact remains that George W. Bush was AWOL and a deserter. He was a disgrace to his uniform and should have received a dishonorable discharge. Add Your Comment |
|
UN Envoy Heads to Burma with Urgent Relief Message
Email
Print
Share
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Ma.gnolia
Newsvine
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Yahoo
Jump to Comments
Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|Comment Policy
Copyright © 2008 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.
COMMENT TOOLS:
Hide comments
Show comments
Comment on this article