Complete Independent Panel report on CBS NewsExhibits and Appendices for reportOfficial CBS News reaction and actions taken
Posted on 01/10/2005 7:32:00 AM PST by Thanatos
-snip-
The attacks on the September 8 Segment began virtually immediately. One of the first came on freerepublic.com, a website:...
Did we find out WHO CREATED THE FAKE DOCUMENTS??
Despite the fact that they can't seem to bring themselves to say within a metaphysical certainty that the documents are fakes the report is pretty devestating. It seems that Rather was completly lost in space and was acting as a mouthpiece. For that at least, Rather should lose his job.
ping for later read.
Holy crapola, this is long. Must read later.
Rather Mapes CBS Moveon.org Burkett and that fellow from Georgia openly conspire (breaking laws pre/post- CFR) to destroy the character of a sitting wartime President with false reports
...but in more IMPORTANT news, Armstrong Williams says education vouchers are great for poor black families. Oh yeah, he was alledgedly coached and paid by the GOP to push this EVIL agenda that would free blacks from "education share cropping." Williams regrets his actions, has lost Tribune Radio, and the MSM is jumping on the story as a new Watergate scandal that could possibly topple Bush.
Just another whacky day in Ratherland.
... Panel cannot conclude that a political agenda at 60 Minutes Wednesday drove either the timing of the airing of the Segment or its content.
Complete Independent Panel report on CBS NewsExhibits and Appendices for reportOfficial CBS News reaction and actions taken
Thanks for posting this.
The subject of this report is GW Bush and his guard service instead of Dan Rather, fake documents and CBS. Seems Dan and Maples had six days to get it right and still couldn't come close or did they think we are stupid?
Do not despair, any of us. Some of us wanted more. By practical, network and legal standards, this report is far from a whitewash. It is damning. There has been nothing like this before. In 30 years of TV, I have never seen anything like it.
For an industry that ALWAYS tries to stand behind their work, truthful or not, this is a stake in the heart. The Peter Arnett/CNN "Tailwind" report was bad enough, but this is worse. CBS is the "Tiffany Network," and involves their biggest "News Star." Dan was the brand at CBS, and the brand has been found to be rotten.
Look at the facts. We cannot PROVE the documents were fake. One cannot prove a negative. The overwhelming preponderance of evidence demonstrates that they are forgeries. That is enough, because it is not our duty to prove them false. It was the duty of CNS to prove them genuine. They have not accomplished 1% of that task, and the report specifies how they did not.
Senior heads rolled. The one that will make the most impact is not Rather, (everyone knows he was over the hill) but rather Betsy West. She was "golden." Now she is gone.
It goes further. It states that because Rather voluntarily moved up his retirement date, "no further action is necessary." Between the lines, the words "Dan quit so we don't have to fire him" jump off the page.
This is a huge victory.
This says, not to FReepers, but to the soccer moms and their families that they cannot trust CBS News. We already knew that, but that is not what's important here.
This report will be the core materiel in every journalism class for decades to come.
It will be the core support materiel for our side everytime someone attacks Sinclair or Fox.
It will become the core of the case when local groups challenge the relicensing of TV stations that no longer serve the needs of or reflect the values of the communities they are licensed to serve.
It will be the document lawyers use in libel, slander, and false light cases to show a pattern of behavior.
Every ABC and NBC salesman will have a copy in their briefcase whenever they are selling commercial time against "CBS Evening News." Ratings will decline further.
My guess: long term cost to CBS? 80-150 million $.
It's Martin Luther time all over again, and someone had just nailed this report to the newsroom door.
To give you an idea of how this is being received, spoke to 3 former CBS colleagues this morning. The word "sh*t" was in each of their opening sentences to me.
There will be major, longterm fallout over this.
We are winning.
From page 28:
H. Political Agenda
The Panel is aware that some have ascribed political motivations to 60 Minutes Wednesday’s decision to air the September 8 Segment just two months before the presidential election, while others further found political bias in the program itself. The Panel reviewed this issue and found certain actions that could support such charges. However, the Panel cannot conclude that a political agenda at 60 Minutes Wednesday drove either the timing of the airing of the Segment or its content.
Given that the Panel does not believe that political motivations drove the September 8 Segment, questions likely will be raised as to why these massive breakdowns occurred on this story at an organization like CBS News with its heritage and stated commitment to the highest standards of journalism. The Panel heard from many that the Rather/Mapes team was a formidable force at 60 Minutes Wednesday. Great trust was placed in Mapes, a highly respected producer who had just produced a widely acclaimed segment on the Abu Ghraib prison abuses, and vast deference was given to Rather, the “face” of CBS News. These factors, along with the “crash” of the production, contributed greatly to the failures of the September 8 Segment and the Aftermath.
Blather's own prejudice and hatred proved to be his own downfall...and just like the rest of the Left, he will go to his grave in denial.
No.
"Mapes was also asked at the meeting whether the original documents were available. At
least two people present at the meeting recalled that Mapes indicated that it was not possible to
get the originals. Mapes said that, if originals existed, they were in the possession of her
source’s source, who was not willing to cooperate. Mapes also said that the documents were not
on letterhead because these types of personal memoranda typically would not be on letterhead.
b. The Source
One or more of the people present at the meeting recalled that Mapes was asked various
questions about the source, such as who he was, did she trust him, what was the source’s
relationship to the documents, where did the “scrubbing” take place and whether the source had
witnessed the “scrubbing.” Several people recalled that Mapes said that her source and her
source’s source had witnessed the purging of President Bush’s files in the 1990s, were offended
by this and had taken other files that they realized might have been purged, including those of
Lieutenant Colonel Killian. One person recalled that Mapes said her source was nearby when
her source’s source took the documents and that the documents remained with her source’s
source, who now lived in Germany and was “unavailable,” until he gave copies to her source.
No one present at the meeting asked Mapes why the source’s source was “unavailable” or
demanded that she find him before airing the Segment. The Panel finds this to be a significant
omission.
Those present at the meeting recalled that Mapes expressed “enormous confidence” in
her source’s reliability and said that he was solid with no bias or credibility issues. In terms of
trust, those present at the meeting also recalled that Mapes conveyed confidence in her source
and did not reveal the source’s name or anything negative about the source. Mapes, on the other
hand, told the Panel that she was “almost certain” that she identified Lieutenant Colonel Burkett
by name when speaking to the group. Mapes also recalled giving them a sketch of Lieutenant
Colonel Burkett, and, in particular, telling them that he was a “difficult,” “moralistic stickler”
who had medical problems, was a disgruntled former Guardsman, and was anti-Bush. Mapes
also told the Panel that she told the vetters that her source had become a controversial figure in
February 2004 when his story about the “scrubbing” was publicized and challenged. Mapes said
that she told the group that she did not think that the source had forged the documents.
The Stoneage Press sinks further into irrelevance.
Pray for W and Our Troops
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.