Dan Rather has reached an agreement to leave CBS after 44 years with the network. During the vast majority of that time, Rather was seen as the face of the old and respected media outlet.
Rather covered everything from the Kennedy Assassination and Vietnam to 21st century terrorism.
He has interviewed everyone from Clinton to Saddam.
He is regarded as one of the best broadcast journalists in history, with his name having been a source of security and truth in almost every American household for almost a half century.
But he lent his voice to one other piece of coverage that casts a shadow, though unfortunately, over his career when he narrated the 60 Minutes Wednesday broadcast on President Bush’s military record in September 2004. The true tragedy: except for his “talking head” role in reporting the story, Rather failed to play almost any role its production. He didn’t even attend the screening of the piece before it aired.
In his farewell broadcast this past weekend, Rather expressed disappointment that his recent role within CBS had been cut. He was reporting about half as much for 60 Minutes as he had before the September broadcast. It may, however, have been his distinguished career over 44 years that saved him from a far worse fate.
And that’s how it happens.
For the record, the 60 Minutes report on the president’s military service in the Texas Air National Guard has never been irrefutably disproved, though CBS admits they “failed to follow basic journalistic principles in the preparation and reporting” of the September 8, 2004 broadcast.
This situation has been referred to as Rathergate, but Dan Rather was not fired or even removed from his anchor and reporter roles--though he would leave the anchor role a year earlier than planned. Four people did go however: Senior Vice President Betsy West, Executive Producer Josh Howard, Senior Broadcast Producer Mary Murphy, and producer Mary Mapes. The former three were asked to resign. The ladder, Mapes, was the only one immediately fired. Mapes produced the widely discredited piece.
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
1 - Mr. Real Estate
Rather's downfall began in 2000 on election night when he announced Al Gore the winner before the official results were in. It turned out, that once the results were in, George Bush was the actual winner. I was working at CBS affiliate WTSP 10 that night, and Rather reported Gore the winner before we got anything from the wire (I was waiting for the wire to report numbers so I could give them to my producer). If Rather were more thorough, he probably would not have lost credibility when bloggers outed him for being wrong in 2004, and that loss of credibility made him lose viewers, which eventually lead to him being let go. If people lose trust in a journalistic source they're going to watch someone else, or read a bunch of blogs, which is what a lot of us are doing these days.
2 - John Guilfoil
And that's great for the bloggers, bad for the old order of journalism.
A lot of the major networks jumped the gun on the 2000 election night, but I agree that CBS stuck out a bit. However, that's not why Rather lost his anchor position and is now leaving CBS and indeed it was a much smaller blunder by comparison that did not help his image as a liberal pundit.
3 - Mr. Real Estate
There's no doubt about that.
I think it all added up. It takes more than one gaffe to can a major personality most of the time. There may have been one thing that was the straw to break the camel's back, but I'm sure there were a stack of straws underneath that one in Rather's case.
4 - Brent
Now I may not be remembering this right but didn't Rather's declaration of Bush as the winner in 2000 come as a result of a call on another media outlet - I think it was Fox News - and was related to data coming from someone there who had ties to the Bush campaign. Of course Rather was jumped on because after all it was Fox News and he should have waited for more confirmation. Blame a pilosophy in all of the networks that constantly looks for the "beat" on a story.
5 - Dave Nalle
Rather was good because he was stylish, shoot-from-the-hip and much more personal in his presentation than his competition. He was a little weird and quirky and a lot less aloof. That came at the expense of being less professional, more partisan and ultimately less competent, and that was bound to catch up with him eventually. He was willing to play fast and loose with the news to increase the drama, and while that's great entertainment it's not great journalism.
Dave
6 - Grant
Stop all the boo hooing over Rather. He was paid almost 250 million dollars for his career. He had a job with tremendous perks that the average person that do real jobs will never get or see. These are overpaid over indulged prompt readers. He was last in the ratings for years, which would have been enough to fire the average person. Let him take his money and quitely sink to oblivion. I'm glad he's gone and hopefully more will leave also.
7 - methuselah
Rather was making about $8-9 million per year, so the exec who had a payroll savings cost bonus, usually about 5% with 4 years amortization, worth about $32-36 million, would get about $1.7 million for getting rid of Rather. Not bad.
8 - JustOneMan
Blather was the Mother of All that is wrong with the Main Stream Media..rather than reports the facts he decided to bypass the truth and report his intrepretation of the facts...he is a victi, of his own doing...
In fact he has become the Poster Boy for those who seek to rewrite and recreate historical and factual events...
Blather deserved to end his career as the fool that he his..
Just my opinion of course..
9 - MCH
JustOneMan;
The fact is, Texans For Truth offered $50,000 to anyone who witnessed GW Bush serving at Dannelly Air Force Base...the fact is, no one collected...
10 - Bliffle
Seems to me that Rather was the semi-innocent victim of a smokescreen designed to divert attention from GWBs nefarious activities in the TANG.
11 - Clavos
Seems to me that Rather was the semi-innocent victim of a smokescreen designed to divert attention from GWBs nefarious activities in the TANG.
nefarious
* (adv.) Wicked in the extreme; abominable; iniquitous; atrociously villainous; execrable; detestably vile.
Hhhhmmm. A bit overstated, perhaps?
12 - MCH
No, I think it actually was "detestably vile" for GW to 1) buy his way out of 'Nam, thereby causing someone else without his power and connections to die face down in the mud in his place over there; and then 2) not even have the decency to show up for his cushy meetings the last two years...
13 - Nancy
I don't quibble with Junior ducking active duty so much as I do him lying about it at later dates. Ducking the duty is detestable; lying about it years later is vile; but Junior's spoiled rich kid behavior doesn't hold a candle to that of Smilin' Dick Cheney & his five (5) deferments, because he "had better things to do", as if those who died or did serve in 'Nam did not. Cheney, IMO, really IS nefarious & cowardly, not to mention psychopathically indifferent to his own vileness.
14 - Clavos
Isn't hyperbole a wonderful writing tool?
It does lose its impact when overused, though.
15 - MCH
On the other hand, Rush Limbaugh's draft-dodging (medical deferment for a cyst on his ass) wasn't nearly as nefarious...
16 - Nancy
No - that was ludicrous.
17 - Joe
But Kerry was in 'Nam!
Don't forget Clinton.
Hippy liberals play the game too.
18 - John Guilfoil
It's money and means that signify "getting out of war" not politics and ideology.
19 - Cass
Even if the story was patently false, I wish that they hadn't decided that Katie Couric would be a better choice. Probably what happened was that Couric's contract was coming up for renewal and CBS thought it would be a coup to lure her away. What a mistake. Edward R. Murrow is rolling over in his grave.