CBS News Concludes It Was Misled on National Guard Memos, Network Officials Say

New York Times ^ | 9/20/04 | Jim Rutenberg

[finnman69]

SCHADENFREUDE

[ThomasMore]

CBS News officials have grave doubts about the authenticity of the material, network officials said last night.

Welcome to reality, Rip Van Winkle!

[OldCorps]

CBS concludes...blah, blah, blah, hummma, humma

Old Corps concludes (a long time ago) that Mr. Dan Blather is a commie 5th columnist (not the writing kind) whose agenda driven 'reporting' [newsreading] has no basis in fact.

[madameguinot]

That's what my middle-school students do! Someone look up Kohlberg's stages of morality! :)

[ThomasMore]

Mr. Rather and others at the network are said to still believe that the sentiment in the memos accurately reflected Mr. Killian's feelings,

Prove it! you lyin SOS!

[RockinRight]

What's left of CBS will be split off and sold to Fox and other networks within 5 years...

[ThomasMore]

Dan Rather is a liberal ideologue and NOT a journalist.

[madameguinot]

When will 'Blockhead' apologize to "Buckhead?"

[2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten]

This is essentially the equivalent of someone buying a "Rolex" watch out of the back of a truck in a WalMart parking lot, being told that the watch is "GenUWine" and insisiting that it is despite the fact that all your friends are laughing at you and the word "Rolex" is misspelled.

[ALOHA RONNIE]

.

Ever since during the Vietnam War...

CBS News has bee ruiness to us all.

.

[BradJ]

Only took about two weeks.

[rod1]

I guess CBS needs to have pajama attire day at the Central headquarters. Because their currently stupidity and lack of professionalism is glaring.

[Republic]

"It was unclear last night whether Mr. Burkett told Mr. Rather that he had been misled about the documents' provenance or that he had been the one who did the misleading. "

[ This is NOT GOOD ENOUGH. Why is UNCLEAR? If Mr. Burkett 'doctored' FEDERAL MILITARY DOCUMENTS or had someone else do this-there may be a FELONY INVOLVED. Period. If Dan Rather cannot determine this-WHAT RIGHT DOES HE HAVE TO PURSUE the chain of custody of information HE LAID UPON THE AMERICAN PUBLIC in an effort to bring down a sitting USA President?]

"In an e-mail message yesterday, Mr. Burkett declined to answer any questions about the documents. "

[HUH? This needs to be INVESTIGATED as well. Why is this man refusing to answer questions? Did CBS demand this? Did Dan Rather request this? Is this man, who may have committed a FELONY going to be allowed to HIDE OUT? Who is going to do the job DAN RATHER has apparently failed to do?]

We are waiting, impatiently. And we will NOT ALLOW CBS to continue this attempt to smear a United States President to further an agenda to destroy him and to break America's trust in this good man.

[BulletBobCo]

[MeekOneGOP]

Mary Mapes:

[clintonh8r]

Will Gunga Dan give up his fugly daughter, Robin, who was surely involved in this?

[clintonh8r]

"Does this look infected to you?"

[P H Lewis]

CBS News exectives (shown above) leave the CBS Commissary after a hearty breakfast of funnel cakes to plan their next move in the journalisic quagmire known as "Rathergate".

[CaptSkip]

Editorial" in this context refers to content that is not advertising. Same goes for print media.

??????

I was taught that editorial is required to be separate and distinct from news, because one is fact based news and the other is opinion or analysis. That's why there is an op-ed page in newspapers, O'Reilly's show is analysis, Rooney's musings are opinion, and when your local-yookel anchor gives "his 2-cents" that segment is highlighted as such through graphics or a lead in disclaimer.

This is basic ethics in journalism and required by the FCC for broadcast.

The FCC DOES require that "program length commercials" or "infomercials" be identified during the program as "paid-advertising" so the public is not confused by folks selling supplements and oil-treatment via what looks like a "news" story.

The "Rathergate" 60-Minutes piece, as presented, HAD to be NEWS based on FACTS, not EDITORIAL...unless they had identified it as ONLY Dan's or Mary Mapes', or CBS' opinion.

That's my reason for hi-lighting the silly comment...

"The editorial story line was still intact, and still is, to this day,''

[girlscout]

NO! You mean none of it was true? I'm SHOCKED! Shocked I say. (/sarcasm)