CBS Says It Can't Vouch for Bush Documents

zimv20

macrumors 601
Original poster
Jul 18, 2002
4,388
7
toronto
link

i would like to congratulate karl rove for an excellently played strategy. he truly is one of the shrewdest and sharpest political minds of the day.

i remain curious -- did rove find out these documents could be uncovered, so he decided to make some fakes and feed them to CBS? if so, it worked brilliantly, 'cuz to this day no one is discussing the seemingly accurate content.
 

LethalWolfe

macrumors G3
Jan 11, 2002
9,366
119
Los Angeles
Funny, I was thinking about starting a thread of the same topic but w/different content. From what I've seen people are glossing over the fact that the docs are fakes and focusing on the content (especially CBS for obvious reasons).

I think think there are two issues here, but people are treating them as one. The first issue is the contents of the memo, and the second issue is the docs being fake, and how CBS handled it.

I think the latter(sp?) issue goes beyond politics. We are supposed to be able to trust news organizations (everything taken w/a grain of salt, of course) to report the truth, not report what they want to be the truth. This, IMO, ranks up there w/Dateline blowing up trucks and a CNN staffer producing a completely unfounded story about Agent Orange and Vietnam. What makes this worse is how CBS "circled the wagons" and seemed completely oblivious to the fact that they could be wrong. At least Dateline and CNN seemed (memory is a bit fuzzy) more proactive in auditing themselves and seeking to protect the truth instead of their story.


Lethal
 

stubeeef

macrumors 68030
Aug 10, 2004
2,702
2
zimv20 said:
link

i would like to congratulate karl rove for an excellently played strategy. he truly is one of the shrewdest and sharpest political minds of the day.

i remain curious -- did rove find out these documents could be uncovered, so he decided to make some fakes and feed them to CBS? if so, it worked brilliantly, 'cuz to this day no one is discussing the seemingly accurate content.
Keep your eye on the ball, or should I say hot potato, as cleland-the dnc-kerry try to pass it on. I find your conspiracy theory pure garbage (satire) as I am most aware that you will be leapt upon for making such unsupported rumint (rumor intelligence). As many here have/would say ' provide your link, where are your sources? blah blah.

I appluade your satire, for it is also ironic :p :p :p
 

zimv20

macrumors 601
Original poster
Jul 18, 2002
4,388
7
toronto
you're right. CBS did shoddy journalism and have lost my respect.

the biggest story to me is: where the heck did these things come from?
 

zimv20

macrumors 601
Original poster
Jul 18, 2002
4,388
7
toronto
makisushi said:
I thought this was a pretty good response from Pat Buchanan.
from his piece:
An investigation must be conducted into who tried to affect an election and bring down a president using forgeries of federal documents.
an investigation won't happen. i think this stink came from either the RNC or the WH.
 

Lyle

macrumors 68000
Jun 11, 2003
1,874
0
Madison, Alabama
I Must Admit...

... that I'm surprised that CBS backed down on this one. I was discussing this with some friends this weekend and expressed my opinion that they (CBS) would continue to stick to their guns for a few more weeks until the story just "went away".

It's not a big secret that most Americans have a short attention span, and I honestly believe that if CBS had held out a little longer the controversy would have dissipated. I mean, this admission from CBS doesn't tell me anything new; they're just finally owning up to what a number of other media sources (both mainstream and pajama-wearing) figured out weeks ago. And for the true believers, who really do believe that Karl Rove is somehow behind this, it's not going to change anything either, right?

I guess what I'm saying is that this only damages CBS' credibility in the eyes of those who (1) care about credibility and (2) believe that CBS still had some to damage.
 

Chip NoVaMac

macrumors G3
Dec 25, 2003
8,889
25
Northern Virginia
Saddened that they did not take more caution in releasing the "documents".

If anything it helps Bush, and makes other "accurate" charges of his lack of duty suspect. One has to really wonder who this guy was really working for....
 

stubeeef

macrumors 68030
Aug 10, 2004
2,702
2
Well it doesn't hurt that it was rather, from the right of center it has long been argued that he was extremely bias, especially when it came to the Bush family. I am sure that many more ethical and less "hellbent" left of center journalist would have run from this junk from in a flash. rather was a willing (seething) participant-it would be expected of michael moore, but CBS?
rather's response to the early claims, and later ones too, as many said-it smacked of coverup, the usual political type of retoric, instead of a more journalistic response from rather showed his hand. Blaming the right wing was his first mistake, cause a lot of the center and some left (wordmunger) called it from the start.
Now how many want to watch rather cover the election?
From the right-I never did, from the left-still some, from the center- alot less. It will hurt his agenda in the long run, as he will now be reporting to the choir (assuming he wasn't before). :cool:
 

mactastic

macrumors 68040
Apr 24, 2003
3,647
661
Colly-fornia
I wonder who's more biased, Dan Rather or Tony Snow?

Anyway, I'm sure not going to believe stuff from CBS or Rather as readily anymore. Bias is bias, that doesn't really concern me since there's no getting around it. But sloppy reporting and verification procedures are a weak attribute in any journalistic organization. That particularly holds true with such an explosive and potentially damaging story.

However, this flap over the documents has once again obscured the real question of what Bush was doing while he was supposed to be serving, and who risked their life in his place because he was well-connected. Why did he fail to show up for a physical, resulting in his being grounded? And why can no one credibly prove he was where he said he was? And what's with the claim he was also in the Air Force? And the phony medals?

Question the documents, but also question the president about the subject matter.
 

makisushi

macrumors 6502
Jul 15, 2004
301
0
Northern VA
zimv20 said:
an investigation won't happen. i think this stink came from either the RNC or the WH.
To me it sounds like slander. If someone tried to get you fired with made up crap. You would prolly sue that person.
 

Thomas Veil

macrumors 68020
Feb 14, 2004
2,436
5,531
OBJECTIVE reality
You know what? Sure, CBS's credibility takes a huge hit, but that does happen from time to time (or New York Times). Overall, their reporting is good, and a damn sight better than CNN or Fox. At least they owned up to it, which is what I expect a respectable news operation to do. If this had happened at Fox, they'd be denying it from now until the Final Trumpet sounds.

And all of this ignores the fact that the secretary who typed Killian's memos said that, while that particular memo wasn't real, she did type one like it.

So the story, by way of testimony, is apparently still true, even if the documentary evidence is false.
 

LethalWolfe

macrumors G3
Jan 11, 2002
9,366
119
Los Angeles
Thomas Veil said:
You know what? Sure, CBS's credibility takes a huge hit, but that does happen from time to time (or New York Times).
An honest mistake is one thing. Being irresponsible and, seemingly, reporting an agenda instead of the truth is quite another. What happend at CBS was not an honest mistake.

Overall, their reporting is good...
Is it? If such a big story is, apperently, treated so carelessly how much attention do smaller stories get?

At least they owned up to it, which is what I expect a respectable news operation to do.
They owned up to it only after a week of getting absolutely hammered. And before they even owned up they knew they were screwed which is why Rathered interviewed the secretary (an attempt to soften the blow and cover their butts).

If this had happened at Fox, they'd be denying it from now until the Final Trumpet sounds.
So what? Should we pat CBS on the back for, after great pressure, eventually owning up to being negligent? Are CBS's actions somehow less bad because another network may or may not be worse (assuming they ever get into the same situration)?

And all of this ignores the fact that the secretary who typed Killian's memos said that, while that particular memo wasn't real, she did type one like it.
The accurracy<sp?> of the contents of the memos is one thing. The fact that a respected news organization attempted to pass these memos off as real with apperantly no sincere attempt to verify their legitimacy is quite another.

Attempting to prop up the secretary's story by using the fake memos as crutches doesn't sound like a very good idea.

So the story, by way of testimony, is apparently still true, even if the documentary evidence is false.
The story, by way of hearsay, is still hearsay sense the only supporting "evidence" are fabrications. The secretary didn't create the content in the memos. She merely wrote what her boss may, or may not, have told her to write.

No offense man but those are some dubius sounding ethics.

"Memo-gate" (hehe) is bigger than Bush. It's bigger than Kerry. It's thans bigger this whole freakin' election. This rocks the ethical core of journalism and the trust between the journalist and the public. As a person in the TV industry, and a graduate of a school that is nationally recognized for it's production/broadcast journalism program, this violation of trust is unthinkable to me. I would berate a first year student over something like this. No, check that, I would suspend (and maybe kick out of the program) a student for a stunt like this. The fact that it happend at a major news organization is just... astounding to me.


Lethal
 

Thomas Veil

macrumors 68020
Feb 14, 2004
2,436
5,531
OBJECTIVE reality
Lethal, the college from which I graduated may not have been particularly recognized for journalism, but I took courses in it, and I've worked in broadcast and industrial TV as well. And a lot of your statements seem to rely on assumptions, not facts.

You have no idea exactly how or to what degree CBS was misled (maneuvered?) into telling this story. You expand this one incident to indict years and years of news from their entire organization. You minimize their efforts to be above-board and correct errors. You're way too eager to pass off the secretary's statements as more or less irrelevant. And you've expressed no interest in whether this is some Machiavellian Karl Rove/Roger Stone plot.

Plus, how am I supposed to take your views on journalism seriously when your post contains errors in spelling and sentence structure?
 

mactastic

macrumors 68040
Apr 24, 2003
3,647
661
Colly-fornia
Just out of curiousity Lethal, how do you feel about Judith Miller? Has the NYT gone down in your estimation to the degree that CBS has?

Is any news organization/anchor that has had a major scandal no longer an acceptable place to get news, or can they rehabilitate themselves?
 

LethalWolfe

macrumors G3
Jan 11, 2002
9,366
119
Los Angeles
Thomas Veil said:
Lethal, the college from which I graduated may not have been particularly recognized for journalism, but I took courses in it, and I've worked in broadcast and industrial TV as well.
I didn't mention my background in an attempt to label myself an expert. I mentioned my background to help illistrate my POV and show why this issuse has gotten under my skin so much. That, and I think it would be a killer time to be in the ethics course. Talk about a meaty case study.

And a lot of your statements seem to rely on assumptions, not facts. You have no idea exactly how or to what degree CBS was misled (maneuvered?) into telling this story.
The Producer failed to get the documents authenticated<sp?>. It might have been an honest mistake, or it might have been because she wanted the docs to be real. Either way she screwed up big time. The fact that she, from what I've read, is a very open liberal that didn't like Bush Sr. and doens't like Bush Jr. doesn't help her case out much.

You expand this one incident to indict years and years of news from their entire organization.
I'm not trying to use this one inncident to completely blast all of CBS News, but this black mark does have a ripple effect (I might have come off too strong in my last post). Am I going to boycott CBS or anything like that? No. I like 60 Minutes (another reason this incident really gets me), but this will always sit in the back of my mind. It's going on CBS's "permenant record" if you will.

You minimize their efforts to be above-board and correct errors.
I'm not minimizing. I'm stateing what happend. Rightfully CBS is investigating Mapes and hopefully they uncover the entire can of worms.

You're way too eager to pass off the secretary's statements as more or less irrelevant.
Are you too eager to accept them as absolute truth? I'm not going to make judgements based on nothing but hearsay. Killian's family doesn't belive he wrote the memos. Now it's hearsay and he-said, she-said. Find real evidence that supports what she says and I'll give her words more weight. Right now it's just hearsay.

And you've expressed no interest in whether this is some Machiavellian Karl Rove/Roger Stone plot.
I'm very interested in finding out where these docs came from. But where they came from is a seperate issuse than why the producer at CBS failed to verify the authenticity of those memos. Assuming it was a very clever political move to get the documents into Mapes' hands that still doesn't lessen the magnitude of her screw-up regarding the physical evidence once it came into her posession.

Plus, how am I supposed to take your views on journalism seriously when your post contains errors in spelling and sentence structure?
How am I supposed to take you seriously when you make comments like that? So my opinion is some how less valid because I lack perfect spelling and grammar( I'm not a journalist and I wasn't an English major)? It's a little soon to sink to that level isn't it?

Mactastic,
1. I'm not familiar w/the Judith Miller issue. 2. Once burned twice shy. I still watch Dateline even though, probably 10 years ago now, they rigged trucks to explode. I still watch CNN even though a producer there had a completely BS story about Agent Orange and Vietnam a few years ago. Forgive but don't forget. ;) And if, over time, my "forgive" column gets too long I'll stop getting news from that source.

Sorry if any parts of this post are confusing, or I missed something completely. I wrote it bit-by-bit while at work. When I get home I'll address anything I missed before.


Lethal
 

mactastic

macrumors 68040
Apr 24, 2003
3,647
661
Colly-fornia
LethalWolfe said:
Mactastic,
1. I'm not familiar w/the Judith Miller issue. 2. Once burned twice shy. I still watch Dateline even though, probably 10 years ago now, they rigged trucks to explode. I still watch CNN even though a producer there had a completely BS story about Agent Orange and Vietnam a few years ago. Forgive but don't forget. ;) And if, over time, my "forgive" column gets too long I'll stop getting news from that source.
Link

Miller is an idealogue, but do you hear the right complaining about her when they rip into 'theliberalmedia'?
 

zimv20

macrumors 601
Original poster
Jul 18, 2002
4,388
7
toronto
LethalWolfe said:
1. I'm not familiar w/the Judith Miller issue.
briefly - she's a NYT reporter. in the run up to the iraq war, she published piece after piece which was quite pro-war and echoed whatever the adminstration and the iraqi national congress (i.e. chalabi) were saying at the time. she was nothing more than a mouthpiece, and many of "her" assertions have proved to be false.
 

LethalWolfe

macrumors G3
Jan 11, 2002
9,366
119
Los Angeles
mactastic said:
Link

Miller is an idealogue, but do you hear the right complaining about her when they rip into 'theliberalmedia'?

Thanks for the link. Of course people aren't going to be mad if you are reporting what they want to hear. ;)

Going soley by that link Milller needs to be fired, never to work as a journalist again, and all the editors at the NYT need to get sacked as well. The fact that this was allowed to go on is just... unimaginable. All reporters and news organizations have is their credibility and choosing sales over the truth is a sure fire way to lose that credibility.

Mactasitc, in regards to your original Q, CBS News is no where near the sub-basement that the NYT has seemingly sunk to. What appears to be an isolated incident at CBS looks like S.O.P. at the NYT. Disgusting. :mad:


Lethal
 

Thomas Veil

macrumors 68020
Feb 14, 2004
2,436
5,531
OBJECTIVE reality
Lethal, listen to yourself:

LethalWolfe said:
What happend at CBS was not an honest mistake.
LethalWolfe said:
The Producer failed to get the documents authenticated<sp?>. It might have been an honest mistake or it might have been because she wanted the docs to be real.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LethalWolfe said:
If such a big story is, apperently, treated so carelessly how much attention do smaller stories get?
LethalWolfe said:
I'm not trying to use this one inncident to completely blast all of CBS News...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LethalWolfe said:
As a person in the TV industry, and a graduate of a school that is nationally recognized for it's production/broadcast journalism program, this violation of trust is unthinkable to me. I would berate a first year student over something like this. No, check that, I would suspend (and maybe kick out of the program) a student for a stunt like this.
LethalWolfe said:
So my opinion is some how less valid because I lack perfect spelling and grammar( I'm not a journalist and I wasn't an English major)? It's a little soon to sink to that level isn't it?
I don't even know what to make of your stance any more. It's all over the place and confusing, especially in that last set of quotes. Are you involved in journalism -- teaching, practicing or otherwise -- or aren't you? I'm not taking a cheap shot, but I can't respond to what look like inconsistent answers.

Perhaps I'm wrong and the secretary can't be trusted either. But that just makes the story even muddier. Is she in on it, too? Or does she have her own agenda?

I suspect we're not even close to knowing all the details.
 

LethalWolfe

macrumors G3
Jan 11, 2002
9,366
119
Los Angeles
In regards to the first set of quotes, after reading your reply to my previous post I re-read it and thought, in some parts, I did come off sounding too "matter of fact." In an attempt to not come off as sounding like I'm making a bunch of assumptions I re-phrased some things sense we don't know exactly what went on.

In regards to the second set of quotes, did you miss me saying, "I might have come off too strong in my last post"? And the initial Q, "...how much attention do smaller stories get?" was a rhetorical one.

I don't even know what to make of your stance any more. It's all over the place and confusing, especially in that last set of quotes.
All over the place? If anyone else is as confused they aren't mentioning it.

Are you involved in journalism -- teaching, practicing or otherwise -- or aren't you? I'm not taking a cheap shot, but I can't respond to what look like inconsistent answers.
First, In no way, shape, or form, did I claim to be a journalist or study to be a journalist. Second, I didn't go into great detail before because I didn't think I would get grilled over it. I majored in Radio/TV production at Ball State Univeristy in lovely Muncie, Indiana. Ball State's program had four "options:" Production, Sales, News, & Corporate video. I worked w/the news guys (shooting, editing) on a few hard news stories, but not investigative type stuff. Hard news wasn't my thing so I did more human interest stories & short films. I graduated in '01 and I've had a vareity of industry jobs sense. I recently moved to LA and I'm currently the Vault Manager for a post/production company by day and freelance editor nights/weekends. Is it clear now, or do you want a bit more detail? Would you like me to fax you a copy of my transcript? Diploma? Résumé? Contact info for my current employer? Copy of my birth certificate? Passport? SS card?

Perhaps I'm wrong and the secretary can't be trusted either. But that just makes the story even muddier. Is she in on it, too? Or does she have her own agenda?
Who knows. I'm not claiming to know if she is being completely truthful or not.

I suspect we're not even close to knowing all the details.
I agree.
No offense, but I get the feeling you are busting my balls. Is there a reason you a nitpicking everything I say (down to spelling and grammar)?


Lethal