Thank You Dan Rather

Thank you Dan Rather. It's balls to the wall time, and as a fellow Texan, you sure came through.

As an investigative journalist who worked as both a reporter and anchor for the San Francisco Bay Area's highest rated newscast for 22 years, I can only say what happened to you nationally was also happening locally. You were told to conform to a Republican agenda or shut up. When you refused to march in step, you got Bush-whacked.

I read your brief and I know the drill. The erosion was slow and many of us barely noticed the small chiseling away of who and what we once were. Anchors and reporters depend on high ratings. If ratings fall in television, people get fired. In the months following 9/11, the President's approval rating was 86 percent, and that's when many in commercial journalism lost their way. To disagree or even ask a disagreeable question regarding the President and his decisions was interpreted as disloyal by many media corporations.

But now we have learned. Get the trashcan ready to catch the chips, because the chisel is swinging back the other way and we as journalists are about to regain our voices and America's trust. Dan - the Man - as we call him in Texas is reminding the media conglomerates how it is supposed to work. News and those who report it are not supposed to be for sale. Dan remembers, and he's about to explain it to us on a national scale, but first some explanations from my field of vision as to how we got here.

On January 2003, President Bush delivered his State of the Union address. Osama bin Laden turned into Saddam Hussein, and Afghanistan turned into Iraq. The press knew this was a bait and switch, but fearing reporters and anchors might appear unpatriotic, the corporate media made it clear that even if George W. Bush played twister in the nude while a few sheets to the wind instead of going to constitutional law classes at Yale, we were not allowed to talk about it.

Viacom and CBS, according to Dan, wanted to curry favor with the White House. There are very few media conglomerates that didn't. Cox Broadcasting banned the Dixie Chicks from radio stations because their lead singer made a remark under her breath criticizing the president! Not wanting to appear unpatriotic, the town criers did not cry out. Many corporate media reporters became stenographers, not reporters on that State of the Union day. Those in television journalism, particularly those working for a Fox affiliate, were not allowed to ask questions that could be perceived as unpatriotic, and every question was seen as unpatriotic. Monarchs and dictators don't allow questions. They also destroy those who speak ill of them. "Scooter - Valerie." "Rove - Anyone." Blackwater was running around in the name of the United States shooting first and asking questions later like third world rebels, and back at home, Fox became the fastest growing network with fearless leaders who believed in not only reporting the news but spinning it as well.

Just seven years ago, I looked up from my desk and saw my image on the MacNeil-Lehrer NewsHour as our staff of independent journalists was described as the best local news in the country. But war broke out and the Internet took off and all over the country local news ratings dropped as viewers turned to the national networks for news from the war fronts. Contrary to all logical thinking, local reporters looked at their retirement plans and their kids in college and promptly puckered their lips on the behinds of corporate media and smooched. If my kids were still in college I would not have the courage to write this now. In response to fewer viewers, local television panicked into a downward spiral and many a trusting viewer decided to go elsewhere. Corporate media was demanding reporters adapt to the point of our own extinction.

Morphed into propaganda machines - cheerleaders with pompoms - it was heartbreaking to watch the demise and media corporations always bass-akwards responses. With two wars on two fronts they decided to go "Local." Only local news. The war and the profound implications of it were relegated to 30 second stories buried deep into the newscast. (they don't need to know about that.--but there's a grass fire up the road!) If that's not manipulation, I don't know what is.

Here are some other sad results of this corporate bullying toward some of the best journalist in the country:

Anchors and reporters stopped asking why. The corporate media demanded nationalism without skepticism, believing ratings would fall further if reporters did their jobs.

Anchors and reporters starting taking their stories from satellite feeds coming directly to their desks and then standing in front of a chroma key delivering a story they did not collect and sometimes did not write. If viewers think every newscast looks the same that's why. It is.

Anchors and reporters allowed chroma key pictures of conflict areas to appear behind them giving viewers the false impression they were on the scene of the conflict instead of demanding to be sent there. Some could not even point out on the map behind them where the conflict was.

Anchors and reporters allowed management to hire entertainment reporters and producers. It's cheaper to entertain than to inform because an informed public makes wakes from slumber and makes noise.

Anchors and reporters began allowing precious hours meant for journalism to be filled with helicopter shots of the latest grassfire, traffic jam, or car chase, ala O.J.

Anchors and reporters allowed news directors and sales people to dictate their "look." Good journalism does not have a "look."

Anchors and reporters did not fight back when their investigative pieces were dropped. Managers feared losing advertising dollars and reporters acquiesced.

Anchors and reporters and producers agreed to story counts. Tell the story no matter how complicated in thirty seconds - throwing random and massive amounts of information at viewers without context.

Anchors and reporters started wearing American flags on their lapels. Some of whom never voted in any election.

Anchors and reporters began using genetically altered language: "War on Terrorism," without explaining that many people in the world think Americans are the terrorists.

Anchors and reporters started referring to the United States government as "We."

Anchors and reporters were handed press releases regarding corporate "mishaps" and began reading them verbatim. Like so: "Blank Oil Company had an explosion today; shelter in place, close the doors and windows, and don't go outside. However, the 'You've Got To Be Kidding Me Oil Company' says everything is fine."

Anchors and reporters agreed to report news that was already reported in newspapers and radio. Doing their own stories or advancing others creates controversy and potential lawsuits, betraying the sacred oath of corporate cronyism.

Anchors and reporters agreed to be physically altered in photographs, and airbrushed with make-up like playboy bunnies, as the media corporations ignored the news and invested in High Definition - hoping a grassfire on HD might look like news.

Anchors and reporters started advertising. "If you liked that story there will be more at six." "If you want to get more information go to www. you're_an_idiot.com. Makes you just want to scream: I'm here now; tell me now!

Anchors and reporters allowed producers to lead with Annie Nicole Smith instead of the "Scooter" Libby trial - making it clear that all sense of proportion and good judgment had been lost.

Corporations in this country are always a reflection of those in the White House. This White House is the Wild West, and corporations, even those who are charged with helping the public gain knowledge, are mining for gold. But today, when we had almost given up, Dan put his holster on.

Comments

[gardengoddess]

Leslie, is this the REAL reason you left? I've wondered, and I think you've answered the question now. Too bad your ex-fellow anchor doesn't have similar courage, because I think his words would carry a lot of weight with viewers.

It's downright exciting to see some of the media starting to wake up. It's about damn time! I really had started to think the 4th Estate had morphed into part of the 4th Reich, so you have no idea how wonderful it is to read from you what many of us picked up on 5 years ago.

I've said this a couple of times, but I'm going to say it again? RATHER'S STORY WAS TRUE! The BBC in England ran the same story a few months earlier, and even though they've received considerable pressure from the White House and even Tony Blair, they have never retracted ONE WORD of their report - which is almost identical to what Rather reported.

[RCronin]

Leslie Griffiths -

Thank you, thank you, thank you. Might I add that the management of the mainstream networks only respond to their masters - the large Corporate advertisers. I can't stand to watch the "bread and circuses" from any of the televised media ( broadcast or cable ). I get all my news from Huffington Post and other on-line resources. I will, however, grit my teeth on occasion to identify the Corporate advertising "enablers" of the televised news channels. I intend to take whatever modest actions I can to boycott, denounce, or belittle the Corporate advertising enablers. The advertisers on the FOX Noise Network are my favored targets.

[BushSunkOurShip]

These excuses don't cut it. Reporters are suppose to give the news to Americans and when they stop they are no longer reporters. Anything else is an excuse.
Our forefathers knew that the news media was America's last line of defense for the protection of our democracy and freedom. When this line of defense erodes there is nothing left. Reporters are talking now because they find it a little safer.
You see a real reporter, when you see the Japanese Reporter Killed In Burma to show the truth AS IT WAS HAPPENING. The Japanese Reporter was coveraging the real news as it was happening , instead of hand feed material coming from the persons creating the deceit and corrution...
If we really had reporters to cover Cheney's administration when this corruption was occuring then we most likely would "not" have LOST our freedom, rights , had our military destroyed, have a $9 trillion debt and be stuck in Iraq with an illegal war against people that had done nothing to provoke it.
There would "not" have been close to 4,000 dead American soldiers, close to 30,000 wounded American soldiers, about 30% of our soldiers having mental disorders, somewhere over a million Iraqe's death, billions of Iraqi citizens turned into refugee in other countries, the whold d... world that has turned from United States as a friend and looked upon us as what they have become, an arrogant nation with no respect for any country's laws and the laws of its own country...
For this reason our reporters are a sorry lot of people and now we are hearing excuses , the same as the Bush administration gives to Americans to justify this administrations deceit and corruption.

WERE IS THE REPORTING ABOUT CHENEY'S PROPAGANDA AND BS ABOUT IRAN SO HE CAN HAVE BUSH INVADE THEM BEFORE IT HAPPENS?.

WERE IS THE OUTRAGE ABOUT RUSH's COMMENTS ON "PHONY SOLDIERS", THE REPUBLICAN's NO 1 BROADCASTER OF BS & PROPAGANDA TO OUR MILITARY "WHICH HE ATTACKED" NOT JUST ONCE BUT MANY TIMES. They certainly have covered the attack on MoveOn.Org.

[Memekiller]

If more journalists like you come forward, the profession can be saved.

Thank you.

[AZM]

Thanks!!!

[freespeach]

Fantastic post Leslie Griffith.

This should be on page 1 of every newspaper in America though the content itself shows why that will not happen.

I'm pleased to see a positive article on Dan Rather here as more than half of the stuff on huffpo was condescending or treated Rather's latest move as trivial. About time we see something like this huffy. Thanks.

I had hoped that Rather's bold move might become a catalyst for change by inspiring reporters from all across the nation to speak up. The tricky part is that this "speaking up" still needs to be covered by our Ministry of Truth corporate media.

Phil Donahue, Aaron Brown, Dan Rather are the three big names that (anyone paying attention knows) exemplify all of the things covered in this post.
No doubt there are hundreds (thousands?) of newspeople in the US who have stories to tell. I hope your post inspires them Leslie.
Keep up the good fight and I hope to see you on huffpo again.

Peace.

[BlackbirdHighway]

Wow, do they still show "news" on TV? I haven't watched any of that crap in about 10 years. You want news these days, you're better off watching Comedy Central or reading The Onion. More informative, more accurate, and certainly more entertaining.

[itsbushstupid]

makes me wonder???
what if the fairness doctrine could come back?

but, then we would need dems w/ backbone.

the only way to stiffen the dems backbone is to destroy peloosie and support sheehan.

let the dems know that they get none of our money to do the bushies bidding.

p.s. when is moveon gonna fry rush?

[LittleBrother]

FWIW, I had dismissed Rather long ago, mostly because of his goofy self-importance and bursts of jingoism-- as when he announced to David Letterman, "George Bush is the President, he makes the decisions, and, you know, as just one American, wherever he wants me to line up, just tell me where."

Another overpaid, deranged Ruling Class infotainwhore, I thought.

But I'm rooting for Dan with this lawsuit. And to respond to one of the previous comments, it seems as if he wants to litigate in order to establish a legal record with competent evidence, using legal tools such as subpoena power. And the usual barrier to building a case involving investigation and expert witnesses-- money-- is not a deterrent here. Dan is in a position to do what few wronged litigants can do: go right for his opponent's jugular with a proper budget.

Merely sitting down at a typewriter, or in front of a camera to present his case doesn't make it. He'd be readily dismissed by his numerous detractors in and out of the corporate infotainment cartel. So I hope it's true that he absolutely will NOT settle, but rather (excuse the pun) intends to vindicate himself in a process that will guarantee maximum disclosure.

If I'm wrong, I'll go right back to dismissing him. But I don't see him agreeing to all of the confidentiality clauses routinely included in settlements, which would in effect pay him to shut up and go away forever. My sense is that being gagged for life just for a few more dollars is the LAST thing he wants.

Go Dan!

[IntrepidReader]

The framework for the kind of network "news" we have now was laid in the 1970s, with the concept of "happy talk" formatting.

This consisted of jazzy-looking sets, attractive anchors, and lots of cute banter, all designed to grab ratings from the competition. Prior to the Vietnam era, TV marketing departments ignored the news as a source of potential revenue, but all those viewers tuning in for news of the war changed their minds. No longer was the 30 minute newscast seen as a service to the community, it was seen as a way to bring in lots of advertising money.

Making news flashy and entertaining became more important than making it accurate or useful, and it was a short jump from there to where it is today, barely one step above tabloid garbage. There was no sudden jump from responsible and informed journalism to chattering bubble-headed bleach blondes reading from teleprompters; it was a slow decline over 25 years--Dirty Laundry, the song I borrowed a line from, was popular in the 80s and decried what TV news had become even then.

[pcplz]

Thank you, thank you! Finally. Someone speaks the truth. As an ex-international flight attendant of 25 years seniority, I watched our news of international relations become more and more plain propaganda. I have been relying on www.onlinenewspapers.com for my news. I go to the country in question and check out what they have to say. In other words...I do what you once did. I investigate and don't believe all that I see and hear.

It would be wonderful to once again believe in my newsmen and women to tell it 'as it is' and not as they want us to hear. I applaud Dan Rather for having the largest, uh, in the media and for you for speaking out. Maybe we can once again become a respected country. That will only happen when the average Joe has access to the correct information.

[pcplz]

Oh, and also, I hope the coverage of Dan Rather's lawsuit garners as much attention as Britney or OJ.....or even Anna Nicole Smith!

[JSquercia]

Sadly it won't . We have had several days worth of coverage on briney losong her babies relete with an interview with the body guard on Dr Phil .

[veracity]

Thank you, Leslie Griffith, for the best MSM confessional I have ever seen!
However, you do gloss over at least one point:
Starting with the late Molly Ivin's book, "Shrub," (in print long before the election), I was able to read up on Bush's real record, and even his "AWOL from Texas ANG" particulars, with no problem at all. Then Lt. Bush had been ordered to take a flight physical exam as part of his million dollar jet-pilot training - he never did. He was then ordered out of the state of Texas to prevent a court-martial that would embarrass his powerful, Republican father - he never showed up for that "make work" duty assignment at an Alabama ANG station.
Then there is also the story of Swiped election 2000 - how Jeb Bush, Katherine Harris, and Bush cousin John Ellis at Fox 'news' on election day all did their darndest to undo the votes of of thousands of legal voters in Florida that fateful day. (Actually, Gore sealed his own fate when he selected Joe Lieberman - the most outspoken Democratic critic of President Clinton's 'moral values' - to be his running mate. By doing so, Gore bought into the MSM/Republican "moral values" narrative. Lieberman would show his true colors immediately: he didn't even have the class or dignity to put his all into running to become the nation's Vice President, Lieberman instead put a good deal of effort into his senate re-election campaign. Had Gore-Lieberman won the election by an undistputed margin, that Conn. senate seat would have gone to a Republican appointed by the Republican governor. Some "party loyalty" and dedication on Mr. Lieberman's part!)
Not to dwell on those two issues, but if in real estate the mantra is "location, location, location" in news, the mantra is "timing, timing, timing." Anyone can cover a story after it has been investigated and reported - CBS and Dan Rather should have covered the "Bush AWOL" story when Americans were first forming their opinions of the governor from Texas.

[cam]

A large part of the confusion around the Florida recount arose because Gore-Lieberman initially wanted the count restricted to only the disputed constituencies, a count they believed they had a greater chance of winning.

They created the frame that the Supreme Court subsequently used to halt the state-wide recount.

It would be nice to know how much of that undemocratic blunder was Lieberman's doing.

[arealtexsun]

Had to laugh when I read your post, I thought I had written it. So true, every word. If every voter had been required to read Molly's book (I really miss her) SHRUB, George W. Bush would never have been elected. She had the facts backed up all the way.

Also, Gore would have won overwhelmingly had he not used very poor judgment in selecting Lieberman for VP - he listened to the wrong people and distanced himself from a very popular president who did an amazingly good job in spite of having to fight off the right-winger zealots trying to destroy him every minute of the day 24/7. When they destroyed Dan Rather, like so many others like Richard Clarke and Valerie Plame, I thought it must be a plot and veracity in news was dead on arrival.
Maybe there is still hope left and Dan Rather is exonerated when the lawsuit exposes the true facts.

[hillpill]

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
Dan the man, is where it's at.
God speed.

[MinM]

Thank You Leslie Griffith,

There was a very good documentary over 10 years ago that spoke to this issue ..

"Fear and Favor in the Newsroom"
http://www.freespeech.org/videodb/index.php?action=detail&video_id=9830

[dadw5boys]

conspiracy
noun
1. a secret agreement between two or more people to perform an unlawful act
2. a plot to carry out some harmful or illegal act (especially a political plot)
3. a group of conspirators banded together to achieve some harmful or illegal purpose
Harreit Myers needs to face a jury for her part in the conspiracy to cover up Bush Military records along with anyone who helped her or destroyed paper.
Are Bush's Military records the only ones missing from that Texas Reserve Unit?
Was it an election in 2000 or a Coup.

[Marlyn]

"Harreit Myers needs to face a jury for her part in the conspiracy to cover up Bush Military records."

YES ... so how is it that Harriet Myers doesn't have to respond to a congressional subpoena?

[ianrthorpe]

Fortunate;y things are not so bad in Britain. We may not have a wriiten consitution to guarantee us free speech (but is that a bad thing when the constitutional right to free speech is used to devend the right of religious nuts to call for the murder of abortion clinic staff?) but we do still have a free press and broadcast news sector. And some sections of that are still brave enough to stand up to the machine.
America needs to ditch the drum beating, flag waving patriotism and embrace a new nationalism based on love of one's community not blind loyalty to the nation state.

http://machiavelli.blog.co.uk/2007/10/03/not_proud_to_be_british~3078480