1
   

Dan Rather Vs. Cbs

 
 
Reply Sat 22 Sep, 2007 10:39 am
Dan Rather Won't Take any "Bullshine"

Katrina vanden Heuvel Thu Sep 20, 11:38 PM ET

The Nation -- It was riveting television. There was former CBS news anchor Dan Rather, sitting across from CNN's Larry King, railing against the threat powerful media corporations pose to freedom and journalistic integrity. "You can't have freedom if you're going to have large corporations and government intruding on investigative reporting," Dan told a none-too-happy King. Dan's championing of independent media got me thinking about The Nation's first centerfold. Published twelve years ago on glossy paper, this wasn't your typical centerfold. It was a pull out four- page silky spread depicting the media multinational giants which determined so much of what we saw and heard. There were GE, Disney/Cap Cities, Westinghouse (later Viacom/ CBS) and Time-Warner as octopi.... At that time, the threat media consolidation, hyper-conglomeratization posed to our democracy was not an issue on the national radar for debate, let alone televised conversation. But in these last years, as the line between news and entertainment has been forever obliterated--a media and democracy movement has emerged to challenge corporate control of our publicly-owned airwaves. In 2003, three million citizens, in a transpartisan alliance, petitioned the FCC to halt the repeal of cross-ownership rules restricting how many tv or radio stations, newspapers one company could own in one town. Today, media consolidation is the subject of conferences, tv shows, Charlie Rose chatfests, books, legislation and FCC Commissioner Michael Copps has emerged as one of the country's most eloquent champions of more localism and diversity of media ownership and content. And it now appears that Dan Rather will join the hearty and growing band of media reformers as another strong voice on this issue. Certainly, Rather, judging from tonight's CNN interview, views his lawsuit against Viacom, CBS and three of its corporate employees as an attempt to expose--using subpoena power-- how big media conglomerates are more interested in pacifying the powers-that-be than supporting public interest investigative journalism. The trial, if it goes to trial, will put corporate executives like Sumner Redstone under oath--allowing questions about what role the Bush White House may have played in Rather's fate at CBS. Just last April, Rather---perhaps prefiguring the lawsuit he would file-- spoke of the political pressures people working in corporate newsrooms face. In Bill Moyers' superb PBS documentary reporting on how the media--with a few exceptions-- failed to do its job in the runup to war, Rather spoke of how: " Fear is in every newsroom in the country. And fear of what? Well, a combination of : If you don't go along to get along, you're going to get the reputation of being a troublemaker. There's also the fear, particularly in networks. They've become huge, international conglomerates. They have big needs. Legislative needs, in Washington. Nobody has ot send a memo to tell you that that's the case...and that puts a seed in your mind. Well, if you stick your neck out, if you take the risk of going against the grain with your reporting is anybody going to back you up? " Dan Rather was never a newsman who went along " to get along." But now, as songwriter Kris Kristofferson might have put it, Rather seems like a man who understands that freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose. And he's decided he's going to use his freedom to fight for the future of free and independent media.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 2,043 • Replies: 35
No top replies

 
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Sep, 2007 09:38 am
@aaronssongs,
Rather was wrong in reporting about Bush, and derelict in his duty to vet the story. Now he is chasing the snipe again and probably will lose.
aaronssongs
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Sep, 2007 10:14 am
@Curmudgeon,
Curmudgeon;38660 wrote:
Rather was wrong in reporting about Bush, and derelict in his duty to vet the story. Now he is chasing the snipe again and probably will lose.


Rather was absolutely correct to report the story....information, had we been armed with, may have resulted in Gore being elected outright.
As it stands, CBS, got in bed with the Bush administration, as did many media outlets (on the corporate side, for hope of gain in clout and profits), and chose not to criticize this president, on all fronts...especially softballing on the ascent to war, and in essence, gave him the open door to do anything, unhindered.
The result...an executive branch trumping the other two branches of government, with the judicial, actually becoming an extension of the executive branch...the most powerful and corrupt administration in US history, bar none.
CBS, hung Rather out to dry, capitulated and deferred to the powers that be.
In doing so, they became complicit in the deterioration of freedom of the press, and the pursuit of "truth", above all else.
They (CBS) will either settle out of court, or they will lose in court.
George Bush used daddy's pass to get through school, to get out of active combat during the Vietnam War, to get into business (baseball & oil), and to get elected to both governor of Texas and the US presidency. No rocket science needed.
0 Replies
 
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Sep, 2007 10:49 am
@aaronssongs,
Even possibly false information, I don't agree.
If the truth were in his reporting he should have verified that truth first.
0 Replies
 
crackface mcgee
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Sep, 2007 01:29 pm
@aaronssongs,
Dan Rather's biased, false reporting made him completely irrelevant at the end of his career, which is actually sad considering the number of years he put into this. He allowed himself to get caught up in and contribute to the current environment of what should be fact-based reporting attempting to influence public opinion. So it really is his own fault.

I have very little interest in this story because of his irrelevance, so this is probably all I will post on this thread.
aaronssongs
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Sep, 2007 03:38 pm
@crackface mcgee,
crackface_mcgee;38691 wrote:
Dan Rather's biased, false reporting made him completely irrelevant at the end of his career, which is actually sad considering the number of years he put into this. He allowed himself to get caught up in and contribute to the current environment of what should be fact-based reporting attempting to influence public opinion. So it really is his own fault.

I have very little interest in this story because of his irrelevance, so this is probably all I will post on this thread.


Fortunately, not too many folk care what you think.
Dan Rather will be vindicated.
crackface mcgee
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Sep, 2007 03:40 pm
@aaronssongs,
aaronssongs;38694 wrote:
Fortunately, not too many folk care what you think.
Dan Rather will be vindicated.


But everybody is interested in your maniacal rantings.
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Sep, 2007 10:21 pm
@aaronssongs,
Dan Rather, vindicted, LOL.
0 Replies
 
aaronssongs
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Sep, 2007 11:36 pm
@aaronssongs,
Do you even know who Dan Rather is?.
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Sep, 2007 11:59 pm
@aaronssongs,
Yeah, he's the guy that had some flunky make up some forged documents and tried to sell them as authentic and got busted.
aaronssongs
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2007 08:45 am
@Drnaline,
Drnaline;38746 wrote:
Yeah, he's the guy that had some flunky make up some forged documents and tried to sell them as authentic and got busted.


Wrong. Once again, talking about stuff you have no clue about. That was hearsay...and they got it wrong...and you got it wrong. Rather than to make yourself appear foolish, try silence.
0 Replies
 
briansol
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2007 12:38 pm
@aaronssongs,
is it REALLY the Anchor's job to verify information? or is it their job to look pretty and be articulate, and read the teleprompter???
Silverchild79
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2007 01:09 pm
@aaronssongs,
I can guarantee you that is I ever go on prime time TV with earth shaking news that would tank a presidential candidates chances for re-election I'll be damn sure to check my facts

the truth is that CBS planned this to happen right before the elction in an effort to last minute dirt sling before the truth was found out and they failed, Dan Rather needs to have a little more integrity and just admit he fooked up
aaronssongs
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2007 01:13 pm
@briansol,
briansol;38840 wrote:
is it REALLY the Anchor's job to verify information? or is it their job to look pretty and be articulate, and read the teleprompter???


No...it's not the anchor's responsibility...it's the news director and producer, and ultimately the network execs. There are a bunch of people responsible for what the anchor reads on air.
0 Replies
 
aaronssongs
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2007 01:16 pm
@Silverchild79,
Silverchild79;38854 wrote:
I can guarantee you that is I ever go on prime time TV with earth shaking news that would tank a presidential candidates chances for re-election I'll be damn sure to check my facts

the truth is that CBS planned this to happen right before the elction in an effort to last minute dirt sling before the truth was found out and they failed, Dan Rather needs to have a little more integrity and just admit he fooked up


Precisely....it was CBS's choice to go ahead with the news story, despite its' inaccuracies. The story was relevant and newsworthy, on its' own.
CBS hung Dan Rather out to dry , rather than to take responsibility, and now they are rightfully being sued...and he's going to win.
0 Replies
 
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2007 06:50 pm
@aaronssongs,
They hung him out to dry with his other show, which tanked, and he is suing over that.
aaronssongs
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2007 07:18 pm
@Curmudgeon,
Curmudgeon;38893 wrote:
They hung him out to dry with his other show, which tanked, and he is suing over that.


They destroyed his reputation and he is suing them over "that"...how dare CBS scapegoat him in favor of the Bush White House. I say go Dan!
And he is not doing for the money, so said...a sizable portion of his judgement will go to a think tank supporting freedom of journalistic press.
0 Replies
 
mlurp
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2007 09:42 pm
@Curmudgeon,
Curmudgeon;38660 wrote:
Rather was wrong in reporting about Bush, and derelict in his duty to vet the story. Now he is chasing the snipe again and probably will lose.


And if he wins? You still going to try to show how he cheated the courts?
Guess your more perfect. loooooooooool
0 Replies
 
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2007 09:59 pm
@aaronssongs,
If he wins in court ( discounting a pay-off by CBS to appease him ) , I will admit I am wrong in my assessmant of the case.

It would be far out of character for me to claim to be perfect. My past is checkered enough and can be sought out if need be. I have repented of many of my own wrongdoings of the past.
aaronssongs
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Sep, 2007 11:05 pm
@Curmudgeon,
Curmudgeon;38911 wrote:
If he wins in court ( discounting a pay-off by CBS to appease him ) , I will admit I am wrong in my assessmant of the case.

It would be far out of character for me to claim to be perfect. My past is checkered enough and can be sought out if need be. I have repented of many of my own wrongdoings of the past.


I applaud your honesty...I am much further from perfection than you.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Dan Rather Vs. Cbs
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/04/2024 at 02:55:20