It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Dan Rather question

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 29 2007 @ 11:22 PM
Do you think that if Dan Rather were to run the same story that got him fired in 2007 instead of 2004, that he would still have been fired?

Do you think that he should have been fired in the first place?

Wiki quote for a summary on what happened:
"On September 8, 2004, Rather reported on 60 Minutes Wednesday that a series of memos critical of President George W. Bush's Texas Air National Guard service record had been discovered in the personal files of Lt. Bush's former commanding officer, Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian.[3] The authenticity of these documents, initially based on their being proportionally printed, was quickly called into question by a small group of conservative bloggers, leading to claims that the memos were forgeries[4]. The accusations then spread over the following days into mainstream media outlets including The Washington Post[5], The New York Times[6], and the Chicago Sun-Times.[7]

Rather and CBS initially defended the story, insisting that the documents had been authenticated by experts[8]. CBS was contradicted by some of the experts it originally cited[9], of the four experts they claimed, they all retracted later.[citation needed] CBS later reported that their source for the documents, former Texas Army National Guard officer Lt. Col. Bill Burkett, had misled the network about how he had obtained them[10].

On September 20, CBS retracted the story. Rather stated, "if I knew then what I know now, I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question."[11]The controversy has been referred to by some as "Memogate" and "Rathergate."[12]

Following an investigation commissioned by CBS [13][14][15], CBS fired story producer Mary Mapes and asked three other producers connected with the story to resign. Many believe Rather's retirement was hastened by this incident.[16]

Conservative blog sites, especially the Free Republic [17] and Little Green Footballs,[18][19] widely believe and have repeatedly claimed that the documents are forgeries that were created in Microsoft Word and then repeatedly photocopied or faxed to make them look aged.[20] On Thursday, September 20, 2007, Rather was interviewed on Larry King Live commenting "Nobody has proved that they were fraudulent, much less a forgery. ... The truth of this story stands up to this day"

I don't really think he should have been fired in the first place. Add to that that the only question seemed to be with the legitimacy of the documents, not the subject matter, and I especially don't think he should have been fired. I also find it funny that conservatives wanted him ousted for running a story that was based on bad intelligence, that criticized a president who started a war with a country based off of bad intelligence. Kind of hypocritical.

If he were to run the same story today, I don't think it would even be a blip on the radar. I don't think Dan Rather is some sort of messiah or anything, but I do think that he got a raw deal.

posted on Nov, 18 2008 @ 12:33 AM
Ahh, such an old thread with zero love

I just saw this in the nytimes and figured I would add it.

Using tools unavailable to him as a reporter — including the power of subpoena and the threat of punishment against witnesses who lie under oath — he has unearthed evidence that would seem to support his assertion that CBS intended its investigation, at least in part, to quell Republican criticism of the network

The article is an interesting look into his dismissal.

posted on Nov, 18 2008 @ 01:47 AM
Interesting, if it's true Rather ended up being the sacrificial lamb then CBS deserves its last place finish in the ratings every night and another blow to corporate news.

posted on Jul, 22 2009 @ 11:52 PM
Another update to my ancient thread.

Rather Wins Access to Thousands of Documents in Suit Against CBS

Dan Rather won significant victories Tuesday in his suit against his former network, CBS. He won access to more than 3,000 documents that his lawyer said were expected to reveal evidence that CBS had tried to influence the outcome of a panel that investigated his much-debated “60 Minutes” report about former President George W. Bush’s military record.

I still think that Rather got a raw deal. It is no wonder that there is no such thing as honest investigative reporting anymore. Rather is a great example of what happens when reporters actually do their job.

new topics

top topics

log in