One lie can lead to another…and another…and another. Whether or not Dan Rather’s report on President George W. Bush’s National Guard service is fair and balanced or crooked and contrived was beside the point. He lost his job.
The story, which aired on 60 Minutes 2, claimed that Bush received preferential treatment during his time in the Texas Air National Guard. Shortly after CBS posted documents supporting the stories content on their website, they came under heavy fire from critics, or to be more specific, bloggers.
Accusations of many different flavors surfaced: From issues of illegitimate type to political bias, CBS found themselves in a shadow of problems that just kept on building. Once the controversy reached the airwaves, the future of many CBS careers were in trouble.
It still isn’t clear whether or not CBS forged their documents. The investigative panel however, came to the conclusion that CBS did make certain mistakes such as airing the report to quickly and believing too zealously in the truth of their story.
Funny thing is, many news organizations sub came to the same flaws as they covered the controversy. Viewers watched as news sources such as MSNBC and Fox news erringly reported on an erring report. While Corey Pein of the Columbia Journalism Review elaborated on these flaws, I couldn’t help wondering if his own report of the issue was accurate.
This story of CBS’s flawed report is a cautionary tale for all journalists. Because they weren’t careful, they began a spark of distrust in consumers, including myself, that circled around back to them. They turned the truth of their story into a popularity contest. In turn, they became the story and were treated with the same respect.
I agree with your angle on this. Whether or not the documents were truthful is beside the point. Rushing to conclusions and running a non-verified story will get you no where. Credibility is everything!
ReplyDeleteI agree completely with your view on the repercussions of Rathergate, we as journalists need to make absolutely certain that are facts are correct before we report them. If not, the journalism industry will cease to add significance to our society, for no one will trust or follow them.
ReplyDeleteJust a couple of comments about your post. Be very careful about how you phrase words and the implications these phrasings have. For example, at the start of your fourth paragraph you stated, “It still isn’t clear whether or not CBS forged their documents.” I don’t believe people ever thought that CBS actually forged the documents themselves in order to create a fabricated story. Rather, they discovered the documents and did not properly verify their authenticity. If CBS had forged the documents themselves, I am certain the repercussions would have been monumental – much more so than the four firings.
Also, be careful with your grammar and word choice. In your fifth paragraph you use the verb “sub came.” I don’t think this is actually a word. Succumbed was probably the word you meant to use.
Overall, great flow and I enjoyed reading your insights and response to Rathergate!
I like how you emphasize the fact that other news organizations abandoned journalistic principles while covering this story. I truly think this is one of the most concerning aspects of the entire situation. I also think Media consumers should demand accuracy, even in situations such as this one, rather than letting themselves get caught up in the hype.
ReplyDeleteJust to echo: be very careful about asserting claims that you do not support. Asserting that Pein might have a factual error without providing example or explanation is a rather bald way to get yourself into trouble.
ReplyDeleteThat said, the gist of your post was good, and you did bring some good thoughts to bear.
But proof your copy closely before publication.