September 22, 200422 yr yes, someone that gets PWNED that badly without checking the facts for political reasons should get fired. and knowing your and your network's credibility is at stake showed how much reponsibility he has.
September 22, 200422 yr They should, but they won't. And Fritz is 100 percent right, CBS no longer has credibility.
September 22, 200422 yr They should, but they won't. And Fritz is 100 percent right, CBS no longer has credibility. 568285[/snapback] Rather is a freaking anchor! He just did the story! Its not his fault someone gave him bad info, it was someone else's fault he just took the fall.
September 22, 200422 yr Rather should take the fall, and hard. Claiming that he's just an anchor, or that higher ups should bear the brunt of the backlash doesn't hold water. If the docs happened to be true, Rather would be unabashedly taking the credit for breaking the story, not the higher ups. He can't have it both ways. Also, Rather leans very, very hard to the left, and not just with this story. Rather has gone to war with every GOP administration since Nixon, but has had very few run-ins with Dem administrations. This is all a blessing in disguise for CBS, anyways. Rather needed to go, as no one under the age of 50 tuned him in. He's a dinosaur created in a time when anchors and their opinions mattered b/c they were usually the only source of national TV news around.
September 22, 200422 yr Rather doesnt matter anyway, nor does CBS news. havent paid attention to him in years, sad considering he is a texan.
September 22, 200422 yr I will say this much... Whether it's just his "conscience" bleeding through or whatever, the disdain he has for Bush & probably the GOP in general seems to come through pretty clearly. Can't say if that usually shows through though, I rarely watch him. If his feelings interfere with him doing his job objectively & impartially maybe he should think about stepping down. Though I doubt his massive ego would allow that, which is probably the root of the problem anyway. I never watch CBS anyway. Like Fillet said I don't think anyone under 100 does. However, I find it hard to believe that Rather (or anyone in the media for that matter) would pass up a scoop like that on a president, regardless of party. If Gore were president & a similar story arose about him, the same thing happens. The media loves a scandal.
September 22, 200422 yr What bothers me to no end is that these documents revealed close to nothing already known about the Bush TANG.
September 22, 200422 yr the Producer sure deserves much of the blame though. Looks like she'd been busy lately.... She's only a few months removed from a career-defining highlight. Mapes took a story that had received little attention -- the abuse of prisoners by American soldiers in Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison -- and unearthed the photos that gave the story its visceral impact. "She pursued stories very aggressively always," said Jeff Fager, executive producer of "60 Minutes." "She definitely has an investigative sense. She was responsible for the bulk of the work on Abu Ghraib. That was her story."
September 22, 200422 yr Go Peter Jennings! *pumps hand in air* 568632[/snapback] Peter Jennings is a Canadian. Meh.
September 22, 200422 yr Go Peter Jennings! *pumps hand in air* 568632[/snapback] Peter Jennings is a Canadian. Meh. 568636[/snapback] He's my favorite anchor from the big three.
September 22, 200422 yr 1) Peter Jennings is a Canadian-born, American citizen. 2) Rather should be fired. He puts the company in danger, but when has CBS shown common sense as of late?
September 22, 200422 yr he just got U.S. citizenship a couple of years ago. 568639[/snapback] I think it was this past year, but that is another issue.
September 23, 200422 yr IMHO Considering all news affiliates are politically affiliated/motivated/biased in their reporting, then I would say no, you can't fire Dan Rather, unless you fire the faceless coorporations that determine what is news for him on a nightly basis.
September 23, 200422 yr IMHO Considering all news affiliates are politically affiliated/motivated/biased in their reporting, then I would say no, you can't fire Dan Rather, unless you fire the faceless coorporations that determine what is news for him on a nightly basis. 569118[/snapback] Dan Rather is the "faceless corporation" as he is the editorial director of CBS News.
September 23, 200422 yr IMHO Considering all news affiliates are politically affiliated/motivated/biased in their reporting, then I would say no, you can't fire Dan Rather, unless you fire the faceless coorporations that determine what is news for him on a nightly basis. 569118[/snapback] Dan Rather is the "faceless corporation" as he is the editorial director of CBS News. 569121[/snapback] So, you're telling me, Procter and Gamble, Time-Warner, General Motors, or whoever the hell owns the largest percent of CBS stock doesn't lean on Dan to go sensitive on certain issues. Puh-lease. As long as someone who's reporting the news believes in SOMETHING there's going to be some kind of bias. And Rather doesn't own CBS. He's the editorial director, doesn't make him the boss. The boss signs Dan Rather's paychecks and tells him he's doing a good job when he reports on the stories they like.
September 24, 200422 yr IMHO Considering all news affiliates are politically affiliated/motivated/biased in their reporting, then I would say no, you can't fire Dan Rather, unless you fire the faceless coorporations that determine what is news for him on a nightly basis. 569118[/snapback] Dan Rather is the "faceless corporation" as he is the editorial director of CBS News. 569121[/snapback] So, you're telling me, Procter and Gamble, Time-Warner, General Motors, or whoever the hell owns the largest percent of CBS stock doesn't lean on Dan to go sensitive on certain issues. Puh-lease. As long as someone who's reporting the news believes in SOMETHING there's going to be some kind of bias. And Rather doesn't own CBS. He's the editorial director, doesn't make him the boss. The boss signs Dan Rather's paychecks and tells him he's doing a good job when he reports on the stories they like. 569162[/snapback] Even if you buy the Democratic war chant that big, evil corporations are out to kill all that is decent in America, thinking that corporate monoliths are puppeteering news reporting is a bit much. Ever heard of Ockham's Razor? It states that all things being equal, the most obvious answer is usually the correct one. In this case, instead of beleiving in a vast conspiracy being executed by nameless, faceless corporations, how about you try the most obvious explanation: Rather is an over the hill anchor who has both an axe to grind with the GOP the last 30 years and who fears his oncoming irelevancy. Besides, Rather has had umpteen chances to recant publicly and make amends. Instead, he garbles on that even if the docs were fake that thier contents were true. :blink: Gimme a break. It's like me throwing together a fake indictment that states Kerry was charged with kiddie porn. SUre, the docs might be fake, but I swear that the contents are true. What, you want someone to verify it? Well ,I can't find anyone credible to corroborate, but I'll give it over to the Bush campaign and see what they can do. Crapola.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.