More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Dan Rather

Dan Rather

GET UPDATES FROM Dan Rather
 

...And in Other News

Posted: 04/28/11 02:17 PM ET

The next time you hear about another round of layoffs at a TV news division, the closing of a bureau, the decision not to cover a foreign story with full force, remember this week of silliness in April.

Remember the millions of dollars, hundreds of staff and hours of coverage spent on a wedding in London when crises around the globe and here at home festered. Remember the unseemly pas de deux between the press and a reality TV show huckster peddling racially-fraught falsehoods, as both interviewers and the interviewee seek a bump in ratings.

And then please take a moment to remember the eight American soldiers and one contractor killed by an Afghan soldier at the Kabul airport in a war too easily forgotten. Remember the hundreds likely being killed in Syria and Libya, not to mention the death and unrest plaguing countries like the Ivory Coast, which almost never earn more than a mention on our most-watched newscasts.

Remember those who have the least amongst us, struggling after more than a year of unemployment, a long commute they can no longer afford, or the diagnosis of a medical condition that could kill them and bankrupt their family.

The networks couldn't ignore the devastating storms that killed hundreds in the South, but you had the odd juxtaposition of that news being delivered by anchors sitting in front of Buckingham Palace.

There's always the question, is the audience chasing the news or the news chasing an audience? I have nothing against the royals or their wedding. It is a legitimate news story, a big event for one of America's most stalwart allies. We have had a lot of bad news lately, and if you are someone who finds this diversion interesting and exciting, then I think that's great.

What bothers me is the hypocrisy. The idea that we can't afford to throw resources at an important foreign story, but can afford to spend this kind of money on a story like the royal wedding is just plain wrong. The idea that we can't break into regularly-scheduled programming for an address by the president is wrong as well. When the topic was the "Birther Story" (better referred from here on out by the first letters of those two words), the networks jumped right in.

As a journalist, you like to be the one asking the questions. But it's time that some of our news executives gave some answers of their own.

Dan Rather is the managing editor and global correspondent for Dan Rather Reports, which airs Tuesdays on HDNet at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. ET

 
The next time you hear about another round of layoffs at a TV news division, the closing of a bureau, the decision not to cover a foreign story with full force, remember this week of silliness in Apri...
The next time you hear about another round of layoffs at a TV news division, the closing of a bureau, the decision not to cover a foreign story with full force, remember this week of silliness in Apri...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,081
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (45 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
John Genryu
Zen Buddhist priest/IT Consultant
05:14 PM on 05/06/2011
Well said and that's speaking as a Brit in the US.
10:36 PM on 05/03/2011
Thanks, Dan Rather, for once again standing for the truth. I still watch CBS over the other two major networks (FOX is a joke and not counted) but the network is poorer for not having you there. The royal wedding was a bunch of fluff but fluff is the stuff that draws those at the less than 50% intelligence level in America.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:40 PM on 05/09/2011
Dan I miss you like most CBS news watchers. Your replacement except Shieffer was a joke and insult to the intelligent news junkies like me. Your departure was uncalled for. Your age should not have been any cause for worry. We have older supreme court justices and Senators and even a disables President at one time, who could not be fired for mistakes.
The time of good journalism is passed. Even al jazzera and CCTV are stealing our news people. BBC is still better than any US news org.
10:48 AM on 06/12/2011
Dan rather was let go because of something he said instead of read. Journalism these days is very sensationalistic, dramatic, and, often times than not, very shoddy! I personally miss Dan Rather I would even take Connie Chung back I would be in a dream world if Dan Rather was reading my news to me!

I MISS DAN RATHER :)
Bob Calvin
Work hard, work smart!
10:06 PM on 05/10/2011
I never watch the tube news. Three or four well coifed airheads laughing and joking. Besides the news they show isn't news. A third grade class making sandwiches for homeless people? The imminent blizzard that leaves a half inch of snow? They spent the whole news program about a possible blizzard? And tomorrow the news will be about the shortage of milk, bread and Pampers I at area supermarkets. I get my news from my local paper and the Wall Street Jornal.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
slackhaus
06:27 PM on 05/03/2011
For this to come out after my recent post is pure karma. Thank you Dan Rather for your views on the failings of the 4th estate.
02:48 PM on 05/03/2011
Thank the Good Lord above that someone still has the good since to say something the little people would love to say to ALL of the so called news networks and such.
Good job Mr. Rather and thanks for all you do.
11:02 PM on 05/03/2011
.....little people?.......
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:56 AM on 05/03/2011
Mr.. Rather, Thank you for an excellent op-ed piece. As if to prove your point I found it buried at the bottom of the side-bars here on HuffPo.

We as a viewing audience need to encourage a move away from "infotainment" and back to "objective journalism." I am old enough to remember the days of "trustworthy" journalists. Sadly, we have too few journalists and too many "news readers" and talk-show hosts. The only solution to this problem is for viewers/listeners/readers to vote with their feet. Avoiding the infotainment and flocking to real news could make a difference. The question is: can we turn away from the sugar-coated information in this age of instant info in a constant 24/7/365 cycle? I hope we can.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AgedButNotDead
02:54 PM on 05/03/2011
Unfortunately the problem is that the "audiences" for news today are those who crave entertainment over news. We've grown a nation primarily full of world-view ignorant citizens who are terribly proud of their ignorance and whose attention span is about 10 seconds long; hence the love of the Sarah Palins and Glen Becks and the Faux Noise channel. Fortunately there are still enough people to raise Cain when such legitimate news vehicles as NPR are threatened. But with the proposed starvation of public schools and higher education in this country, were headed for an unfortunate future.
10:56 AM on 05/03/2011
I don't care what anybody says, I still love Dan Rather. Sincerely, Bill Burkett
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
GhostOfSchlesinger
09:01 AM on 05/03/2011
Mr. Rather, Thank you for your service, sir. We are a generation that will likely miss what you're saying, but I'm grateful we've at least one voice of dissent in a media choir that sings the glories of grotesque wealth, power and exploitation.

The narcissistic and vainglorious super-majority celebrates the enforced poverty of our age - a world in which less than one percent of our defense budgets would put an end to hunger. Today, 20,000 more children will die of starvation - victims of our collective gluttony. (And, as I write the preceding, I can hear someone saying, "Whoah, dude! Buzz kill!")

In a bitter irony, even the message of Christ has been perverted into a "gospel of wealth" - so that the core message - feeding the poor, protecting the weak, loving our enemies, "selling everything" and following him - is now eclipsed by a falsely-individualized notion of salvation.

We have abandoned our identity as a people. Our great-grandparents would be sick if they saw the self-centered "bread and circuses" that are stealing the soul of an entire generation.

Falsely, we glorify selfishness as the "American Dream." It is not. This new, boorish, angry and willfully-ignorant America in no way resembles the sort of Frank Capra vision of "we the people" that yielded sufficient strength to defeat fascism and communism.

I pray we remember ourselves before it's too late.
10:50 PM on 05/03/2011
All harbingers of a Corporate States of America. Ever see the movie Rollerball?
photo
southingtonian
"I'm a Capricorn and you can't make me do sh*t.."
06:14 AM on 05/03/2011
Oops. posted too soon
"What bothers me is the hypocrisy. The idea that we can't afford to throw resources at an important foreign story, but can afford to spend this kind of money on a story like the royal wedding is just plain wrong." this could describe the general corporate attitude these days. Too expensive to staff schools with enough teachers at a living wage, but heck, give that Board of Ed a raise!
photo
southingtonian
"I'm a Capricorn and you can't make me do sh*t.."
06:11 AM on 05/03/2011
"What bothers me is the hypocrisy. The idea that we can't afford to throw resources at an important foreign story, but can afford to spend this kind of money on a story like the royal wedding is just plain wrong."
photo
collettethehedgehog
My micro-bio is So running on empty
03:24 AM on 05/03/2011
What I understand Mr Rather as saying is not that there should have been NO cover-age, but that it could have been done more cheaply with permanent reporters there to cover it or there could have been coordination with the BBC to save expenses. How is real reporting too expensive, foreign correspondents who spend careers understanding regions too expensive when enough budget to fund these old school reporters for a decade is thrown at one event?
03:23 AM on 05/03/2011
They couldn’t keep quiet because their purpose was not to show us the royal wedding, but to show us that they were showing it to us. This is typical of television news. Supposedly “our window on the world,†television ought to be the perfect medium for events such as this. “One of the things television does best,†boasted Rather, “the thing we do best, is to take you there.†It was true once, but it isn’t true now. Back when television was younger and more modest, it could approach the world with a certain self-effacement; the camera often showed events as if it were a mere onlooker, like ourselves. But now that this medium is older, more successful, and aware of its vast influence, it has itself become the story, half-creating whatever it purports to reveal and calling it “news.â€
03:21 AM on 05/03/2011
Please, I'd Rather not! Are the media supposed to operate in a financial vacuum, taking a cue from D.C? And take a gander at the below, following the Prince and Princess of Wales' wedding in 1981 (it appears in three posts, as there is a limit to the characters one can post per message):
MarCan k Crispin Miller August 22, 1981 | 1:00 am
Here it is, days after the exchange of vows, and I’m still groggy from having watched television’s coverage of the royal wedding. I thought the sun would never set on it. First there were all those preliminary “specials,†and then the day itself went on forever, a seeming eternity of coverage. From the dead of the night into the afternoon, the stalwarts of the news stayed on the job, really covering the whole occasion, like soot. “You want something very, sort of, stirring,†Prince Charles had said (referring to the wedding music), and that’s what the networks gave us: London, teeming and jubilant, half-appeared behind the networks’ correspondents, who would not shut up or get out of the way, but worked for hours to replace or adorn the images with their own dead commentary. They were as tiresome as those other creatures of television, people who talk behind you at the movies.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Libertystblue1923
I live to serve, I serve to live....
02:06 AM on 05/03/2011
Sorry I meant 1969......bad lighting, bad eyes.........Neil and Buzz forgive me!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Libertystblue1923
I live to serve, I serve to live....
02:04 AM on 05/03/2011
Mr. Rather, sir, I remember a tearful Walter Cronkite telling America on the afternoon of November 22, 1963, of the comfirmation of President Kennedy's assasination. I remember the Apollo landing in July 1968 and again WC tearfully joyous and so proud of our America! I remember you asking President Nixon, "No Mr. President, are you?", in response to him questioning you! I remember you on a hillside in Afghanistan, so long ago. Sir, you were a great sucessor to Walter Cronkite! I truly hope America returns to the standard set so long ago and quits the "Entertainment Tonight' mentality!
10:47 PM on 05/03/2011
I agree with all you said until the last sentence. Then you lost me. The news departments of the media must stop with the "Entertainment Tonight" mentality, but won't as long as those departments are run by the entertainment side of broadcasting. It is all ratings driven. As far as America goes.....unfortunately, the American public has now been so "dumbed down" ( on purpose) by the corporately controlled media, that our very concept of a democracy based on
"an informed public making reasoned decisions" is now in jeopardy. The American public is also, now, ratings driven.
12:11 AM on 05/03/2011
I am tired of people like Dan Rather running off at the mouth. All people like him want to do is whine
about the problems in the world 24 hours a day. Then they want to blame you because you are happy
about something. He wants you to feel bad all the time about the problems in the world. You do not have to watch a wedding, a war, a problem in world until you turn on Dan Rather. Then he will mske you feel bad.
09:54 AM on 05/03/2011
You obviously did not read his post. Or perhaps you did not understand it. If you had you would note that he does not begrudge your happiness at inconsequential events. The news has always had its human interest stories. The Royal Wedding was one of them. Instead he grieves for the fact that the American news media has lots its way. No longer are they the 4th estate in our experiment in democracy. To be truth tellers or speakers of truth to power. They are now ring leaders of a variety of entertaining and highly distracting foolish circus acts. When the news agencies have cut down their foreign offices, removed staff and become a part of the news rather than covering it, we are all the worse for it. The role of a free press is to inform. We sadly know that Americans are well too ill-informed about issues that actually impact them directly and politically. More Americans probably know the designer of the bride's dress than about the budget deficit. The fact that so many news companies dispatched senior news readers to London to cover a human interest story is beyond the pale. About 22 million Americans watched the total coverage of the wedding. More people watch an episode of American Idol. Would you be happy if on a weekly basis American news outlets dispatched their top news readers to the results show of AI to breathlessly await the results of that talent contest?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:44 PM on 05/09/2011
LET ME say once more for all who cares, thank you so much Dan Rather!
K T BOSE< Carlsbad CA