Dan Rather and CBS News – Myopic Zealots

George C. Landrith

The long awaited report from the investigative panel hired by CBS to investigate its forged memo scandal concludes that Dan Rather and CBS News were “myopic” and “overzealous.” The report also concludes that Rather made false and misleading statements in defending the bogus “news” story. The report stopped short of blaming the outrageous miscues on bias, but that hardly seems necessary. Dan Rather’s errors were not honest mistakes. Initially, his blunders were born of extreme bias and shortly thereafter were exacerbated by cover-up and dishonesty.

Last fall, during the height of the 2004 presidential election, Dan Rather broke a sensational story on 60 Minutes criticizing George W. Bush’s service in the National Guard during the Vietnam War era. Within minutes of the broadcast’s conclusion, it became clear that the story was based on forged documents and unreliable sources. The forgeries weren’t even clever fakes – documents that should have been typed on a 1970s era typewriter were created using a current computer, word processor and laser printer. To make matters worse, the forgeries refer to the instructions of a commanding officer who had retired and been discharged from the military 18 months before the memo was supposedly written. Countless experts stated with virtual certainty that the documents were forgeries – including former FBI examiners with more than thirty years’ experience. Even CBS’s own experts warned that the documents could not be authenticated.

The reason Dan Rather and CBS News nonetheless reported the bogus National Guard story is because it so completely reinforced their own views and prejudices that they were willing to overlook the obvious fact that the documents were sloppy forgeries and that their “unimpeachable” sources were laughably unreliable. That is the very definition of bias.

Dan Rather even argued that regardless of the authenticity of the documents, the story was true and President Bush should answer the allegations – concluding that because Bush did not respond to the allegations made in the forged memos, the charges must be true. That puts Dan Rather among the lunatic fringe.

With that standard in mind, I’d like Dan Rather to answer a few questions. I have bogus documents stating that Dan Rather was involved in Jimmy Hoffa’s disappearance, that Rather is former KGB agent and that he was even a co-conspirator in Abraham Lincoln’s assassination. I realize that Dan may be tempted to dismiss these charges by simply saying the documents are forgeries, but as Dan Rather has said, “Answer the questions.” Refusing to answer only proves the charges true. As Dan said, “The longer we go without a denial of such things – this story is true.” These are Dan Rather’s rules. But, I am being a great deal more honest and fair because I have openly disclosed my sources are phony. I make no false claims of authenticity and I will not disingenuously “stand by the story” for two weeks. Now you understand the twisted and biased logic of Dan Rather.

Bias is not hard to prove when a reporter knowingly presents false and misleading information. It is possible, however unlikely, that Rather did not know the memos were forgeries when he first reported the story. But there is no question that Dan Rather knew what he said over the next 12 days was false. He assured us CBS document experts had authenticated the memos. They had not. He promised us his sources were “unimpeachable.” They were not. He claimed he had reviewed the journalist research and promised it was professional and first rate. It was not – such work would have failed any high school journalism class. He steadfastly told these whoppers for 12 days. These were not honest mistakes. They were purposefully deceitful.

Without a sincere and complete apology, Dan Rather will never again be a serious journalist and will remain nothing more than a biased and dishonest newsreader. Some may say, “Wait a minute, Rather apologized for his mistakes.” No, he did not! He apologized that he was misled. He never apologized that he misled America. Those are two very different things. Dan Rather did not truly apologize because he did not actually apologize for his wrongs.

Dan Rather will not offer a real apology because it would require him to admit his bias and dishonesty. As silly as it may be, the mainstream media has for years reflexively denied any bias. However, rational people no longer doubt the bias of the “mainstream” media. Even the Assistant Managing Editor of Newsweek, Evan Thomas, said, “Let’s talk a little media bias here. The media, I think, wants [John] Kerry to win. And I think they’re going to portray Kerry and Edwards…as being young and dynamic and optimistic and all, there’s going to be this glow about them…that’s going to be worth maybe 15 points.” Media bias is as obvious as the full moon on a clear night.

As a result of the panel’s report, four people at CBS were fired or asked to resign. But Dan Rather, the managing editor and the man who lied to America for almost two weeks, was not among the casualties. He should have been. Interestingly, Rather did not even have the courage to show up for work the day the panel’s report became public. He called in sick – saying he was too tired to come to work. I can relate –
I am sick and tired of biased news from dishonest and spineless newsreaders.

###

Mr. Landrith is a graduate of the University of Virginia School of Law, where he was Business Editor of the Virginia Journal of Law and Politics. He had a successful law practice in business and litigation. In 1994 and 1996, Mr. Landrith was a candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives from Virginia's Fifth Congressional District. He served on the Albemarle County School Board. Mr. Landrith is an adjunct professor at the George Mason School of Law. He is recognized as an authority on constitutional law and jurisprudence, federalism, global warming, and property rights.

george@ff.org