Courage for Dan Rather

Gee, just when I was all excited about Wednesday's big premiere of the new CBS cultural triumph Kid Nation, my old friend Dan Rather went and blew my whole evening out of the water by filing a massive lawsuit against the company.

Here we go again.

It has been three years since we aired our much-maligned story on President Bush's National Guard service and reaped a whirlwind of right-wing outrage and talk radio retaliation. That part of the assault on our story was not unexpected. In September 2004, anyone who had the audacity to even ask impertinent questions about the president was certain to be figuratively kicked in the head by the usual suspects.

What was different in our case was the brand new and bruising power of the conservative blogosphere, particularly the extremists among them. They formed a tightly knit community of keyboard assault artists who saw themselves as avenging angels of the right, determined to root out and decimate anything they believed to be disruptive to their worldview.

To them, the fact that the president wimped out on his National Guard duty during the Vietnam War -- and then covered it up -- was no big deal. Our having the temerity to say it on national TV was unforgivable and we had to be destroyed. They organized, with the help of longtime well-connected Republican activists, and began their assault.

Actually, we had done a straightforward, well-substantiated story. We presented former Texas Lt. Governor Ben Barnes in his first ever interview saying that he had pulled strings to get the future president into the National Guard after a Bush family friend requested help in keeping the kid out of Vietnam.

And we showed for the first time a cache of documents allegedly written by Bush's former commander. The documents supported a mountain of other evidence that young Bush had dodged his duty and not been punished. They did not in any way diverge from the information in the sketchy pieces of the president's official record made available by the White House or the National Guard. In fact, to the few people who had gone to the trouble of examining the Bush record, these papers filled in some of the blanks.

We reported that since these documents were copies, not originals, they could not be fully authenticated, at least not in the legal sense. They could not be subjected to tests to determine the age of the paper or the ink. We did get corroboration on the content and support from a couple of longtime document analysts saying they saw nothing indicating that the memos were not real.

Instantly, the far right blogosphere bully boys pronounced themselves experts on document analysis, and began attacking the form and font in the memos. They screamed objections that ultimately proved to have no basis in fact. But they captured the argument. They dominated the discussion by churning out gigabytes of mind-numbing internet dissertations about the typeface in the memos, focusing on the curl at the end of the "a," the dip on the top of the "t," the spacing, the superscript, which typewriters were used in the military in 1972.

It was a deceptive approach, and it worked.

These critics blathered on about everything but the content. They knew they would lose that argument, so they didn't raise it. They focused on the most obscure, most difficult to decipher element of the story and dove in, attacking CBS, Dan Rather, me, the story and the horse we rode in on -- without respite, relentlessly, for days.

Soon, traditional media began repeating some of the claims and joining in the attack on the story. They didn't do any real work on the substance of the story; they just wanted to talk about typeface. And that was an empty, unsolvable argument that did nothing but serve the purposes of the Bush administration, which had been fanning the flames of the controversy and hoping to avoid any hard questions.

The fracas scared the bejeezus out of the CBS corporate types who were completely unaccustomed to the rough and tumble interaction of the blog world. Frankly, the foaming-at-the-mouth response scared me, too. These people WERE scary. Who wants to see her picture online accompanied by digital catcalls demanding that she be "taken out"? And that was one of the milder posts.

But the truly chilling part of this entire saga is what happened next. Though our story had raised entirely appropriate questions about the president's military record, though there had been substantiation for everything we reported, though this was an issue certainly worth discussing in wartime, all that was lost in the melee that followed.

Because of the angry conservative outcry, the corporation we worked for chose to walk away from an uncomfortable controversy rather than stick up for its reporters.

This is not a new fight. Journalism has always pissed people off. It is supposed to. It should be provocative. It should ask hard questions of everyone on every side. It shouldn't play favorites and it shouldn't fear honest criticism.

In a democracy, journalism cannot fear bullies or pull its punches because somebody powerful might get uncomfortable. That's when we all lose.

In retrospect, I think the real problem with this story is that it ran three years too early. Imagine that a report emerged today saying that President Bush and his enablers had unusual problems finding the most basic records, that key documents had disappeared from official files, that he and his supporters dissembled when asked direct questions. Yawn. The country wouldn't bat a collective eye. No one would be attacked for reporting that. That stuff is old hat now.

But back then in the face of an orchestrated attack, Viacom blinked. The company insisted that Dan Rather issue an on-air apology. We were investigated by a so-called independent panel that wasn't independent and wasn't really a panel. It was a cluster of securities fraud attorneys with no journalistic experience fronted by a couple of figureheads with strong ties to the Bush family.

In reaction to the Rather lawsuit being filed, I read that Republican former Attorney General Dick Thornburgh, one of the two panel leaders, harrumphed that his investigation "speaks for itself." It certainly does. I saw his stellar work firsthand.

Thornburgh and his minions went through all my business emails and at one point during an excruciating, all day session, he personally chose to grill me on an email in which I had used a bad word. I had referred to something as "horseshit" and I had meant it. "Why had I chosen to use THAT word?" he wanted to know. "Why did I feel it was it necessary to use profanity in an email?" Good Lord. No adult should ever be subjected to that kind of ridiculous ritual. What horseshit.

Oops. Sorry, Mr. Attorney General.

In the end, although the Thornburgh panel did clearly discover that the unwashed wretches in newsrooms sometimes use foul language, the intrepid group could not find evidence of bias in our work, could not find malicious intent and could not find that the documents were false. They found that we had "rushed" the story, that we tried too hard to get the story, that we suffered from "myopic zeal."

Our myopic zeal was what gave us the energy and tenacity at CBS News to break the Abu Ghraib story and every other decent, difficult story I have done in my professional life. I think journalism today could use a little more real zeal.

It still sickens me that good people at CBS lost their jobs over this. It breaks my heart that people with a political ax to grind interfered with a story at a major network news outlet.

And I personally pray to God that somebody someday will get some real answers on where George W. Bush was for more than a year while other Americans were fighting and dying in Vietnam. That we have no answers this long after he has taken office and taken us into two wars should disturb every American.

But I'm afraid this entire episode just encapsulates what has happened to journalism in general in this country. It has become corporatized, trivialized and castrated.

I know that filing a suit had to be a tough decision for Dan to make. But I'm not sure he had a choice. This episode deserves to be examined again and this may be the only way to accomplish that. Besides, a lawsuit also gives him that delicious power of discovery. Who knows what might shake loose?

In the meantime, this is what I do know.

Dan Rather is a legendary reporter who has spent decades doing his job like few others -- while bullets flew past his head, or while he was tied to a tree in a hurricane, or when he was chasing down big stories, sometimes on foot. He helped guide the country through communal catastrophes like the Kennedy assassination, Watergate, and 9/11. He has paid his dues.

And at 75 years old, Rather still has more reportorial testosterone than the entire employee roster at FOX News. It is a tremendous injustice to journalism that he has to go to court to be treated with respect.

Courage, buddy. Courage to us all.

Comments

[Rebelfriend]

Mapes is right on. Dan Rather is one of the great reporters of our time, and the sickening degradation of our mainstream media by corporate ownership is one of the most devastating blows to our Democracy perpetrated by the Bush Administration. The media has become lazy, cowardly, and self-agrandizing. Where are the heros? Where are those who have the character and the courage to take a stand for what is right and true? Rather did, and they had to destroy him. Well, I say go for it, Dan Rather, and make them pay for their cowardice and betrayal of the American people. God speed!

[JustAnotherNewsGuy]

Dan Rather is / was / and will forever be known / as the only journalist of his era to actually go into the field without prodding to get the story and do the work himself. It's shameful how big politics were/ and still is allowed to influence the world of journalism. This is a prime example and conclusion of what has happened over the past decade since Disney swallowed ABC, GE gulpped up NBC, and Viacom decided to drink from the bottom line of CBS. All of these corporations see nothing but the bottom-line, making a quick buck. If anyone read John Stossels recent book: if a story involves "FEAR" then it sells. News isn't News anymore unless the public is givin something to be scared of. And reporting isn't reporting unless it sells advertising to line the pockets of executives making their 7 figure salaries.

The problem with Dan and Ms. Mapes story is that it was based on truth.

Let's all keep in mind Dan Rather isn't responsible for:

U.S. Deaths Confirmed By The DoD: 3797
Reported U.S. Deaths Pending DoD Confirmation: 2
Total 3799
as of the time of this post.

In my opinion President Bush's Military record is probably hidden in the same room with those WMDs.

[GenericBlogger]

Dan Rather was far from being the only journalist of his era to get the story himself. Other anchors and reporters worked hard and reported from the field.

After he became the CBS anchor, Dan Rather was more of a show horse than a work horse but gave the impression he is a field reporter who "just dropped by the studio to report today's news."

I applaud anyone who tries to set Dubya's record straight but Dan Rather failed to discredit Dubya's National Guard service. He inadvertetly gave Dubya credence by failing to make a case and blames CBS for his failure.

[Jules36]

I do not hold Rather in the same lofty esteem as Mapes does. It strikes me as pitiful that at 75 years of age he believes "he has to go to court to be treated with respect."

He, too, was guilty of covering up -- by not admitting his involvement in Memogate, not taking responsibility for a story he wanted pursued and delivered too quickly. The investigation proved that his journalistic integrity had also tarnished.

Guiding the country "through communal catastrophes like the Kennedy assassination, Watergate, and 9/11"??!! Gimme a break!

Isn't this the same "venerable journalist" who lost it on air when Reagan was shot? Who stormed off a set when a tennis match threatened to preempt his lordship's broadcast? As Walter Cronkite commented, "I would have fired him."

This is the same "team player" who let the axe fall on his colleagues in 1984. It's reported that he considered many of these colleagues as "second-class journalists" and thus felt no remorse seeing them go.

Rather "courageously led" his network right down the tubes from first to third place in the ratings, crippling an institution.

In 1998 Rather reported on alleged Vietnam vets who had witnessed or performed horrible atrocities. Five of the six "vets" interviewed hadn't even been to Vietnam; the sixth was an equipment repairman.

Mapes has elevated Rather to the level of hero. Not only is her assessment entirely unwarranted, it's an insult to those who really HAVE guided us through these catatrophes: Red Cross workers, volunteers who traveled thousands of miles to aid victims, ordinary citizens who stepped in to help when their government failed.

No one expected Rather to be the next Cronkite, but I doubt anyone thought he would perform so dismally. Rather gave CBS many good years, but if he believes he should be remembered as a revered journalist, I beg to differ. He was and remains the spoiled brat of broadcast journalism.

I was going to ask aloud if this is the way he wants to be remembered -- but perhaps it's fitting after all.

[CarmanK]

You know, I think this issue needs to be revisited. While some people who are still alive and willing to speak the truth. So many records, lost!! I would hate it to go down in the history books, that he served honorably in the National Guard. He does not deserve his name of the same list with the guys who have served this country with honor and courage.

[joyhollywood]

Just wanted to say that I read Mary Mapes book and I came away wanting to write her so I could tell her she and Dan didn't deserve the treatment they received from CBS or anyone else for that matter. No one ever says they find it interesting that the White House can't find that missing year in Bush's National Guard service records. What a surprise. Mary, you and Dan deserve an apology. Best to you and your family.

[Jjc2006]

Bravo!!! Bravo to you and Dan. But it is clear that corporate America still fears the truth. It is clear the the truth has been hidden, and besides the fact that anyone with an IQ over 80 KNOWS that DUBYA got special treatment, dodged the draft and STILL was too busy snorting and drinking to do his cushy duty. It's the elephant in the room.

Watching reliable sources this morning reminded me of how reporters have become the puppets. Talking about betraying us. When "reliable" means Laura Ingram, the world is perverted. And when "old time" friend of Dan are calling him senile, it's sad. We have no independent press any more and THAT is more than sad...it's scary.

[psnyder]

Thanks for the post, Mary. I read your book. The whole episode was a grand diversion employed to prevent the truth of the story from being the story. The Thornburgh panel never had credibility. It was clearly a hit job from the start.

Dan Rather is still doing great work on HDnet. I am looking forward to what discovery might turn up.

[Therese]

Has anyone looked into the fact that the Rove dirty tricks machine set up Dan Rather by passing on a forged copy of a real document? Anyway, I wish the best of luck to Dan Rather and Ms. Mapes. Thank you.

[GenericBlogger]

Clearly the implications for this are profound but the time frame for the greatest impact passed. The story would have been far more significant in the 2000 and 2004 elections. The remaining value of this story is to set the record straight so Dubya's legacy will be accurately recorded in history.

I have a question for Mary Mapes or anyone with extensive knowledge of this story and related events. My question is this.

If the content was substantiated, meaning if someone can prove that National Guard documents misrepresented Dubya's military service, and if the story was discredited only because of discrepancies in typeface and font characteristics, why didn't any other investigator or news organization pursue the story? Why only CBS?

I don't accept the notion that the right wing machine was powerful enough to prevent everyone from continuing this story.

[jwsub28]

Thanks Mary for the truth, and for all you non believers out there it is the truth. Dan Rather is a respected journalist and a professional. CBS along with FOX and so many other people had a huge hand getting us into this war. So many kids and fathers and mothers killed in this ridiculous war. They have their blood on their hands as much as Bush and his cronies. I wish Dan good luck in his suit and I am happy that he is doing it. Bush is a coward that always looked to Daddy to get him out of his messes and he is a horrible president. I can't even watch his face on TV anymore, he sickens me. He tells lies every single time he talks to the American people. For the small percentage of people that still hang with this president you are just plain stupid! That goes for all the Republican's in congress that don't have the courage or sense to stand up to him. If Dan's suit can bring out once in for all where this chickenshit was while others were dying in Vietnam it will be all worth it. He hides while others are fighting. He continues to do the same thing today with Iraq. Let him encourage his children to sign up and go fight this civil war. That won't happen.
Dan continues to be a great reporter, watch HD NET Dan Rather. It is a great show.

[anotherbozo]

Very satisfying reading, Ms Mapes. The most frustrating humiliation I witnessed over the past several years was not Gore's concession to Bush but Rather's having to apologize on camera (again and again!) for something that needed no apology. I remember the story you ran interviewing the secretary of the colonel (?) in charge of Bush's National Guard service: she said words to the effect that "even if the document isn't his, with the facts as they were, it very well could have been. All that it says was true." A point that seemed lost on everyone but those of us with...ears?
I hope Dan Rather wins big. A bit late, but better than never.

[amst]

I hope Rather doesn't listen to the rightwing media and pursues not only the lawsuit but the story. The public was so manipulated, and the kool aide drinkers so numb, it's time for the truth.

Let's not pay attention to the spin, let's get the truth out about our chicken livered yellow bellied, draft dodging President. If Clinton's personal lie and "affairs" were impeachment worthy, than by God this criminal President should have been tossed years ago. Let's prove and "admit" his many sins against our country

[Neaguy]

Greg Palast!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!

Why do all of you, Mapes and Rather and the entire mainstream media ignore the man who had the story BEFORE CBS, did it better and far more in depth, with more evidence, and never backed away when the heat was on?

go here for the real, full story about Bush and his cowardice from the best reporter in the world:
www.gregpalast.com

[davidwparker]

Kudos to Dan. (I've not watched CBS since his termination.)

The important aspect of this is journalism standing up to fascism. We are at a tipping point. One that if the 4th estate doesn't take it rightful place in this democracy, and, if the sheep in this nation don't wake up, then returning this country to representative democracy will only take place by a literal revolution.

I am not joking.

[Tennessean]

I support Dan Rather's lawsuit. CBS deserves this, for their craven capitulation to right-wing hysteria and Republican political pressure. As they say, 'The truth will out." Rather's courage is awesome. Keep fighting for truth, Dan. I wish we could sue those "Democratic" Senators who capitulated like the cowards they are, to Cornyn's craven hysteria over MoveOn.org's ad. If there's any true justice, we will one day witness George W. Bush handcuffed and rendered to the Hague to stand trial for his WAR CRIMES.