Hmmm.... They missed one.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=4&u=/ap/20050110/ap_on_en_tv/cbs_guard
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=4&u=/ap/20050110/ap_on_en_tv/cbs_guard
crimresearch
Alumbrado
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2004
- Messages
- 10,600
Silicon said:
What??? Surely you aren't suggesting that they should have blamed 'the narrator', are you?
Crim,
I know enough about you to know that was sarcastic.
But yes, they should have fired Rather. He used his power as the "star" to run roughshod over those internally who questioned the story.
I watched the story, and I trusted Rather. Just as I trusted Bush and co. when they said they had proof of WMD's and a reconstituted active nuclear program. I guess I'm a sucker for authority figures.
So I feel burned by both of them. If we can't vote out the one who goes to war based on a tissue of assumptions, at least we can fire the one who goes to air with a tissue of assumptions.
Fact-checking. It's a new fad I'm trying to get to catch on.
I know enough about you to know that was sarcastic.
But yes, they should have fired Rather. He used his power as the "star" to run roughshod over those internally who questioned the story.
I watched the story, and I trusted Rather. Just as I trusted Bush and co. when they said they had proof of WMD's and a reconstituted active nuclear program. I guess I'm a sucker for authority figures.
So I feel burned by both of them. If we can't vote out the one who goes to war based on a tissue of assumptions, at least we can fire the one who goes to air with a tissue of assumptions.
Fact-checking. It's a new fad I'm trying to get to catch on.
Cleon
King of the Pod People
Erm, speaking of fact-checking...
Rather resigned a couple of months ago. You can't fire someone once they quit.
Rather resigned a couple of months ago. You can't fire someone once they quit.
Cleon
King of the Pod People
Silicon said:
I would say the loss of his position running CBS Evening News is being "disciplined."
Honestly, I couldn't give half a rat's ass whether he's disciplined, fired, condemned, or given a "happy ending." If you're getting your news reports from prime-time talking heads, you're only getting half the story, no matter who they are and who they work for.
Cleon said:
Wow, then what did Tom Brokaw do to get "disciplined"?
And you say that Rather was "running" CBS Evening News. Shouldn't he be fired if he was RUNNING the news rather than just reading it?
What I can't get is that producers were fired, but not Rather. It's not like the producers were demoted and sent to other shows. They were fired.
Rather misused his power as a star. He's tainted by this. If I were running anything at CBS, I wouldn't have him reporting the traffic. He's not credible.
headscratcher4
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2002
- Messages
- 7,776
So, 4 firings for getting information wrong....that means
CBS 4, Bush Administration 0.
Would that the Administration would fire as many people for blowing the pre-war inteligence as CBS has over this report, than maybe there could be some integrity in government...but I am not holding my breath.
CBS 4, Bush Administration 0.
Would that the Administration would fire as many people for blowing the pre-war inteligence as CBS has over this report, than maybe there could be some integrity in government...but I am not holding my breath.
corplinx
JREF Kid
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 8,952
headscratcher4 said:
Is it okay yet for people to start mimicking others on this forum with their flippant "oh yeah, typical wingnut response, clinton did it first" responses by saying to posts like this "oh yeah, typical wingnut response, bush did it first" ?
headscratcher4
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2002
- Messages
- 7,776
corplinx said:
Actually, I was trying to make a serious point. There will be much celebrating in certain political quarters because CBS was embarassed and that people were fired for an erroneous, badly checked report that was embarassing to the President.
As stupid as CBS turned out to be in this situation, at least someone corporately (4 in fact) paid a price for the error. They may not be the most responsible, maybe some more senior executives should have paid a price, but nonetheless, CBS has made a small effort to say: we were wrong, and we are trying to correct the situation.
The same political corners who delight in CBS's travails also seem completely unwilling to hold the Bush Administration to a similar standard. We know through hard experience of a whole series of miscalculations, errors and faulty inforamtion that have colored the way the Iraq war has been fought and, sadly, may have cost many brave young people their lives.
However, the Administration either can't or won't hold anyone responsible -- fear of seeming weak maybe? The claim that there were WMDs was the premise for the war, it proved to be in error (to be charitable). The people who delivered that information tot he White House did not serve the president well, and yet there's been no one in the political/policy staff held accountable, save CIA flunkies.
In fact, they -- for the most part -- deny that anything has gone wrong at all. Well, as they said on the bridge of the Titanic: it's just a small hole....
As I said, CBS 4, Bush Administration 0.
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
Stephen Colbert made a similar point on The Daily Show a while back. (of course, the clip is not on their website and I can't find a transcript anywhere, so you'll have to trust me on that. or not.) He went into a long, yet generically worded, tirade about leaders taking responsibility for their actions and poor decisions, even if they are based on the shoddy work of underlings. In light of such a horrendous mistake, the only responsible thing would be for those leaders to step down from power.headscratcher4 said:
The punchline of the bit was Jon stopping Stephen to ask, "Stephen, you are still talking about Dan Rather, aren't you?" To which he replied, "Yes, Jon. What other current situation could this be possibly be equally applicable to?"
Okay, I suck at recounting Daily Show bits, but his point was exactly the same as headscrathers, in my opinon.
headscratcher4
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2002
- Messages
- 7,776
.
corplinx
JREF Kid
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 8,952
headscratcher4 said:
CBS had a story on one set of faulty memos.
Bush had a stated policy of regime change with Iraq. To try to get the UN to go along for the ride, his people pitched Iraq's noncompliance with UN resolutions. Of the two sets of complaints A) Iraq not accounting for previous stockpiles and B) Iraq developing new WMDs; A has a mundane explanation and B is demonstrably partially incorrect.
These attempts to paint and apples to apples comparison are amusing. Can you not find other things to say about the CBS scandal other than finding a way to grind your axe against Bush?
headscratcher4
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2002
- Messages
- 7,776
corplinx said:
Yes, CBS did a lousy job and is paying for it.
crimresearch
Alumbrado
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2004
- Messages
- 10,600
headscratcher4 said:
The CBS debacle was not a matter of simply 'getting it wrong', whether the wrongdoers admit it or not.
It was a matter of knowingly using documents which expert after expert in quantitative matters identified as forgeries, and yet refusing to admit that they were forgeries, going so far as to lie after the forgeries were revealed, and even going so far as to attack people who were pointing out the forgeries.
Any action involving the same factors should receive equal criticism, and comparisons would be valid.
Claiming that policies which one disagrees with are exactly the same thing, is stretching it a bit.
crimresearch
Alumbrado
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2004
- Messages
- 10,600
That is one possible view, although I'm unaware of any impartial, qualitative experts who have verified any of the popularly supposed notions about Plame.
Now an apolitical expert forensic analysis, which showed for example, that the Bush administration had forged reports on the killng of the Kurds in order to make it look like Saddam had done that when it actually never happened...that would be well worth the same level of criticism, and demands for heads to roll at the top.
Now an apolitical expert forensic analysis, which showed for example, that the Bush administration had forged reports on the killng of the Kurds in order to make it look like Saddam had done that when it actually never happened...that would be well worth the same level of criticism, and demands for heads to roll at the top.
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
corplinx said:
The Bush admin committed fraud, and knew it, and everyone knows it. For some reason, the mojority if Americans don't care.
Exactly the same thing happened in the Australian elections.
crimresearch said:
We'll see what the grand jury comes forward with.
Nobody's saying that Rather forged the documents in question, or that anyone at CBS did. The problem was they got taken in by documents they wanted to believe were true. Much like the Nigerian Yellowcake document.
Or in any way in any VERIFICATION activities either, it seems.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/14/sprj.irq.documents/index.html
And neither did Rather.
That's the part I think is funny. I watched him interviewing the guy's secretary, when she said those weren't the exact memos she typed, but she did type some that said the same thing. So whatever the source of the papers was, the point of the story wasn't totally false. And that's sad, that they had a real story and ruined it based on using poor sources.corplinx said: