STATEMENT FROM DAN RATHER
EXCLUSIVE // Mon Sep 20 2004 11:58:02 ET
Last week, amid increasing questions about the authenticity of documents used in support of a 60 MINUTES WEDNESDAY story about President Bush's time in the Texas Air National Guard, CBS News vowed to re-examine the documents in question—and their source—vigorously. And we promised that we would let the American public know what this examination turned up, whatever the outcome.
Now, after extensive additional interviews, I no longer have the confidence in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them journalistically. I find we have been misled on the key question of how our source for the documents came into possession of these papers. That, combined with some of the questions that have been raised in public and in the press, leads me to a point where—if I knew then what I know now—I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question.
But we did use the documents. We made a mistake in judgment, and for that I am sorry. It was an error that was made, however, in good faith and in the spirit of trying to carry on a CBS News tradition of investigative reporting without fear or favoritism.
Please know that nothing is more important to us than people's trust in our ability and our commitment to report fairly and truthfully.
Ok lets take this from the top
Problematic sections will be bolded and my comments will follow
Now, after extensive additional interviews
Yes are these like
Interview's with Lt. Col Killian's family -which you put on the cutting room floor-
Ms Knox -who you should have had foot work done on and picked her up, basic journalism 101-
or any of the people the Killian family pointed you to and rebutted the statement
oh wait i am sorry you interviewed the Crank ( i'll say it that way) who was your source.
One interview does not constitute "Extensive" heck, two doesn't either.
the Interviews that showed you at BEST were sloppy, those are extensive
I no longer have the confidence in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them journalistically.
Glad to know Dan Rather breaks this story
yep no one else in the major media pointed this out
ohhhh except NBC,ABC,FoxNews, Washington Post, L.A times, USA today,...etc
I find we have been misled on the key question of how our source for the documents came into possession of these papers.
a source used by Michael Moore and others in the Hate Bush industry who
#1)tells a story which changes as new bush documents are found
#2)Had two nervous breakdowns
#3)Was fired by some of the Bush advisors he "claims" sent word out for the purge when he worked for the First Bush campaign for governor
#4) Who has sued all manner of people in texas state government for a variety of reasons.
#5) who is a democratic activist, and whose lawyer-a canidate for the Texas State supreme court- wants you to help him stop Karl Rove's master plan
this man mislead you?
if I knew then what I know now—I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question.
What did you know then?
the aformentioned questionable source and his motives, the fact none of the experts signed off on the documents, and you had them for ohhhh about 6 days before you got your story ready to air
Dan, It seems you didn't know a whole lot then
It was an error that was made, however, in good faith and in the spirit of trying to carry on a CBS News tradition of investigative reporting without fear or favoritism.
So
Documents you didn't examine-
using experts you didn't listen to-
Not certified by their field's national assosiation-
who said you'd get in trouble-
From a man with an xe to grind against George bush for years-
who amazingly had these documents fall into his lap just after the republican convention-
right...... Dan, i think you need to study what Good faith means
a good faith effort would have been if every possible avenue you looked at said the documents were real and it turns out they were wrong, then you made a good faith effort.
this, this is not good faith.
Please know that nothing is more important to us than people's trust in our ability and our commitment to report fairly and truthfully.
especially those "partisan operatives" in Pajama's who won't accept that what's in the documents are true even if they are not
no, this isn't good enough
No comments:
Post a Comment