Friday, September 24, 2004
Baba Wawa Woves Wather
"You have the support of all of us here," said Ms. Walters to Mr. Rather at a party honoring her 25 years at the ABC News program 20/20. Page Six fills in the rest. Mr. Heyward appears to be resisting the Krazy Glue strategy.
"You have the support of all of us here," said Ms. Walters to Mr. Rather at a party honoring her 25 years at the ABC News program 20/20. Page Six fills in the rest. Mr. Heyward appears to be resisting the Krazy Glue strategy.
Thursday, September 23, 2004
The Krazy Glue Strategy
In an interview on Monday, Mr. Rather said that on learning that Ms. Mapes had obtained the documents, he called Mr. Heyward.
"This is not verbatim," Mr. Rather recalled. "But I said: 'Andrew, if true, it's breakthrough stuff. But I need to do something unusual. It may even be unique. I have to ask you to oversee, in a hands-on way, the handling of this story, because this is potentially the kind of thing that will cause great controversy.'
"He got it. He immediately agreed.'' -- from today's New York Times
Let's summarize Mr. Rather's position: if I go down, (CBS News President Andrew) Heyward goes down with me. Krazy-glued at the hip. as it were. This must have been unwelcome news at the Heyward household this morning; a hostage-taking over Cheerios.
The weird thing about this story is what might be called the "everyone knows factor." Everyone knew that the documents were not, to use CBS's terminology, "authentic." Everyone knew that the position of CBS News was therefore untenable. And now everyone knows that the person most responsible for this debacle is none other than Dan Rather himself. He pushed the story onto the air. He defended it long after it was revealed to be indefensible. He hijacked a great news organization and drove it off a cliff.
Mapes and Howard will be terminated soon -- and for good reason -- but they are minor players. CBS can't get healthy until Rather is gone. He's both an embarrassment and a disgrace.
In an interview on Monday, Mr. Rather said that on learning that Ms. Mapes had obtained the documents, he called Mr. Heyward.
"This is not verbatim," Mr. Rather recalled. "But I said: 'Andrew, if true, it's breakthrough stuff. But I need to do something unusual. It may even be unique. I have to ask you to oversee, in a hands-on way, the handling of this story, because this is potentially the kind of thing that will cause great controversy.'
"He got it. He immediately agreed.'' -- from today's New York Times
Let's summarize Mr. Rather's position: if I go down, (CBS News President Andrew) Heyward goes down with me. Krazy-glued at the hip. as it were. This must have been unwelcome news at the Heyward household this morning; a hostage-taking over Cheerios.
The weird thing about this story is what might be called the "everyone knows factor." Everyone knew that the documents were not, to use CBS's terminology, "authentic." Everyone knew that the position of CBS News was therefore untenable. And now everyone knows that the person most responsible for this debacle is none other than Dan Rather himself. He pushed the story onto the air. He defended it long after it was revealed to be indefensible. He hijacked a great news organization and drove it off a cliff.
Mapes and Howard will be terminated soon -- and for good reason -- but they are minor players. CBS can't get healthy until Rather is gone. He's both an embarrassment and a disgrace.
Wednesday, September 22, 2004
Dear Mary Mapes
The red dot is now on your head. From Howard Kurtz's article this morning (the suits always use Howie to get their messages across):
The most vulnerable employee at CBS would seem to be Rather's producer, Mary Mapes, who not only obtained the discredited documents but also put her source, former National Guardsman Bill Burkett, in touch with Joe Lockhart, senior adviser to John Kerry's presidential campaign.
Note the linkage.
P.S.: Just in case you didn't get the message, the suits were kind enough to leave one on your mobile. You can read the text of that message here.
P.P.S. And they sent you an e-mail via Bill Carter, their water-boy at The New York Times. It reads, in part:
Mr. Rather and CBS executives said Mr. Bush's Guard records had been intensely important to (Mapes), a subject she had been chasing with Mr. Rather off and on for five years.
Several people at the news division, who insisted on anonymity because they had been told not to talk to reporters, said one important line of inquiry in the internal inquiry would be whether Ms. Mapes's zeal clouded her judgment.
Some colleagues and associates questioned whether her politics could have interfered.
P.P.P.S.: One more thing. Today is "tone shift day," the day when the tone of voice of your CBS colleagues (especially your "superiors") changes dramatically. There's a distinct chill in the air, so to speak. Because today is the day that they begin in earnest to try to ruin the rest of your life.
The red dot is now on your head. From Howard Kurtz's article this morning (the suits always use Howie to get their messages across):
The most vulnerable employee at CBS would seem to be Rather's producer, Mary Mapes, who not only obtained the discredited documents but also put her source, former National Guardsman Bill Burkett, in touch with Joe Lockhart, senior adviser to John Kerry's presidential campaign.
Note the linkage.
P.S.: Just in case you didn't get the message, the suits were kind enough to leave one on your mobile. You can read the text of that message here.
P.P.S. And they sent you an e-mail via Bill Carter, their water-boy at The New York Times. It reads, in part:
Mr. Rather and CBS executives said Mr. Bush's Guard records had been intensely important to (Mapes), a subject she had been chasing with Mr. Rather off and on for five years.
Several people at the news division, who insisted on anonymity because they had been told not to talk to reporters, said one important line of inquiry in the internal inquiry would be whether Ms. Mapes's zeal clouded her judgment.
Some colleagues and associates questioned whether her politics could have interfered.
P.P.P.S.: One more thing. Today is "tone shift day," the day when the tone of voice of your CBS colleagues (especially your "superiors") changes dramatically. There's a distinct chill in the air, so to speak. Because today is the day that they begin in earnest to try to ruin the rest of your life.
Side-Winding
Now that the entire world knows that the infamous Killian memos are, in fact, forgeries, it's worth noting that one man -- Dan Rather -- still believes that the documents are authentic. I know I say this over and over again, but really: You can't make this stuff up. Let's go to the text of Dan's crazed interview with the Chicago Tribune:
"Do I think they're forged? No," Rather said. "But it's not good enough to use the documents on the air if we can't vouch for them, and we can't vouch for them."
Memo to the Suits: Get this guy in a straitjacket asap. He's killing you.
Memo to Roger Simon: Many thanks.
Now that the entire world knows that the infamous Killian memos are, in fact, forgeries, it's worth noting that one man -- Dan Rather -- still believes that the documents are authentic. I know I say this over and over again, but really: You can't make this stuff up. Let's go to the text of Dan's crazed interview with the Chicago Tribune:
"Do I think they're forged? No," Rather said. "But it's not good enough to use the documents on the air if we can't vouch for them, and we can't vouch for them."
Rather said he had no regrets for his defense of the story.
"I believed in it," he said. "I wouldn't have put it on the air if I hadn't of believed in it. And what kind of reporter would I be if I put something on the air in which I believed, and as soon as it's attacked and under pressure, you run, you fold, you fade, you side-wind? That's not the kind of person I am, and it's not the kind of reporter I am."Memo to the Suits: Get this guy in a straitjacket asap. He's killing you.
Memo to Roger Simon: Many thanks.
Tuesday, September 21, 2004
CBS Public Relations
How much does CBS miss having the services of John Scanlon? A lot, judging from the events of the last 14 days. The fact that they don't have Scanlon on their team explains, to some degree, their inability to mount a coherent response to this brand-shattering scandal.
How much does CBS miss having the services of John Scanlon? A lot, judging from the events of the last 14 days. The fact that they don't have Scanlon on their team explains, to some degree, their inability to mount a coherent response to this brand-shattering scandal.
Dear Josh
If you think your situation differs from that of Mary Mapes, think again:
If you think your situation differs from that of Mary Mapes, think again:
Unimpeachable Source
That's what CBS News Anchor Dan Rather called Bill Burkett. Read this story and name me one editor in the country who would have the slightest confidence in anything Mr. Burkett had to say.
That's what CBS News Anchor Dan Rather called Bill Burkett. Read this story and name me one editor in the country who would have the slightest confidence in anything Mr. Burkett had to say.
Monday, September 20, 2004
Second Salvo
Dear Mary Mapes --
Following is the last paragraph of an AP story that is moving on the wire:
(Kerry "Message Maven" Joel) Lockhart said Mapes asked him the weekend before the story broke to call Burkett. "She basically said there's a guy who is being helpful on the story who wants to talk to you," Lockhart said, adding that it was common knowledge that CBS was working on a story raising questions about Bush's Guard service. Mapes told him there were some records "that might move the story forward. She didn't tell me what they said."
The suits move fast. More is on the way.
All Best -- Ellisblog
Dear Mary Mapes --
Following is the last paragraph of an AP story that is moving on the wire:
(Kerry "Message Maven" Joel) Lockhart said Mapes asked him the weekend before the story broke to call Burkett. "She basically said there's a guy who is being helpful on the story who wants to talk to you," Lockhart said, adding that it was common knowledge that CBS was working on a story raising questions about Bush's Guard service. Mapes told him there were some records "that might move the story forward. She didn't tell me what they said."
The suits move fast. More is on the way.
All Best -- Ellisblog
A Blue Ribbon Panel
CBS News and CBS management are commissioning an independent review of the process by which the report was prepared and broadcast to help determine what actions need to be taken. The names of the people conducting the review will be announced shortly, and their findings will be made public. -- from an internal e-mail to CBS News employees from Andrew Heyward, CBS News President.
Dear Mary Mapes --
Call your lawyer immediately. DO NOT, under any circumstances, allow CBS counsel to represent your interests.
All Best -- Ellisblog
CBS News and CBS management are commissioning an independent review of the process by which the report was prepared and broadcast to help determine what actions need to be taken. The names of the people conducting the review will be announced shortly, and their findings will be made public. -- from an internal e-mail to CBS News employees from Andrew Heyward, CBS News President.
Dear Mary Mapes --
Call your lawyer immediately. DO NOT, under any circumstances, allow CBS counsel to represent your interests.
All Best -- Ellisblog
Rather Caves, Suits Rule
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. -- statement of Dan Rather, 20 September 2004.
Dear Mary Mapes --
This is their opening salvo. The questions that arise are: (1) why didn't he "know then what he knows now?," and (2) who was primarily responsible for the "mistake in judgement?" The suits will answer both questions with your name.
Note the effort to separate the "story" from the "documents." Dan doesn't do document verification, that someone else's job. The suits will say it was your job.
Read tomorrow's newspapers very carefully, especially the NYT and the WaPo. The second salvo will be found therein.
All Best -- Ellisblog
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. -- statement of Dan Rather, 20 September 2004.
Dear Mary Mapes --
This is their opening salvo. The questions that arise are: (1) why didn't he "know then what he knows now?," and (2) who was primarily responsible for the "mistake in judgement?" The suits will answer both questions with your name.
Note the effort to separate the "story" from the "documents." Dan doesn't do document verification, that someone else's job. The suits will say it was your job.
Read tomorrow's newspapers very carefully, especially the NYT and the WaPo. The second salvo will be found therein.
All Best -- Ellisblog
Blame Shift
Dear Mary Mapes:
Now that the suits have decided to abandon ship, the game begins. The name of this game, as you well understand, is called "blame shifting" and the person to whom the blame will be shifted is you.
This process is now underway. The quotes about your integrity and character will quickly be flipped to read "we had no idea she was as crazy as a hoot owl." The pivot (for them) will be the assertion that you've been working on this story for five years. Diligence, they will say, crossed over to obsession. And obsession, they will say (sadly), caused you to disregard better judgement.
Since they have a record of all your e-mails and phone calls and cell phone calls, they will likely find there a number of telephone numbers and e-mail addresses of people affiliated with the DNC, the Kerry campaign and various anti-Bush 527s. They will use those to destroy your credibility. And they will say that had they known about these "unprofessional" oppo research relationships, which the e-mail traffic and phone calls will almost certainly document, they would never have allowed "your" story to air.
Mr. Rather, your erstwhile colleague, has a choice to make and he will side with management. So if you're looking for help there, forget it.
Hire a lawyer and an agent. Do not resign. Do not agree to any "internal inquiry" until you have talked to a lawyer. Have the agent put out word to various publications that you are drafting a longish article on "what really happened." The one thing they can't afford is "your side of the story" out there for all to read. So they will pay you a ton of money not to publish.
Take the money and run, with a contract that says "one disparaging word about Mary Mapes and the 'tell-all' article runs" on your new blog.
Welcome to the blogosphere.
All Best -- Ellisblog
Dear Mary Mapes:
Now that the suits have decided to abandon ship, the game begins. The name of this game, as you well understand, is called "blame shifting" and the person to whom the blame will be shifted is you.
This process is now underway. The quotes about your integrity and character will quickly be flipped to read "we had no idea she was as crazy as a hoot owl." The pivot (for them) will be the assertion that you've been working on this story for five years. Diligence, they will say, crossed over to obsession. And obsession, they will say (sadly), caused you to disregard better judgement.
Since they have a record of all your e-mails and phone calls and cell phone calls, they will likely find there a number of telephone numbers and e-mail addresses of people affiliated with the DNC, the Kerry campaign and various anti-Bush 527s. They will use those to destroy your credibility. And they will say that had they known about these "unprofessional" oppo research relationships, which the e-mail traffic and phone calls will almost certainly document, they would never have allowed "your" story to air.
Mr. Rather, your erstwhile colleague, has a choice to make and he will side with management. So if you're looking for help there, forget it.
Hire a lawyer and an agent. Do not resign. Do not agree to any "internal inquiry" until you have talked to a lawyer. Have the agent put out word to various publications that you are drafting a longish article on "what really happened." The one thing they can't afford is "your side of the story" out there for all to read. So they will pay you a ton of money not to publish.
Take the money and run, with a contract that says "one disparaging word about Mary Mapes and the 'tell-all' article runs" on your new blog.
Welcome to the blogosphere.
All Best -- Ellisblog
Sunday, September 19, 2004
Rout
Well, you knew that Tiger was going to make fairly short work of Paul Casey, so the key match turned out to be the second; Mickelson vs. Garcia. Could Mickelson derail the best Ryder Cup player on either team?
Not a chance. Garcia destroyed Mickelson over the last eight holes of their match and the rout of the Americans was on. Kudos to the Europeans, who were magnificent. And kudos as always to NBC analyst Johnny Miller, the best in the business by about nine miles.
Well, you knew that Tiger was going to make fairly short work of Paul Casey, so the key match turned out to be the second; Mickelson vs. Garcia. Could Mickelson derail the best Ryder Cup player on either team?
Not a chance. Garcia destroyed Mickelson over the last eight holes of their match and the rout of the Americans was on. Kudos to the Europeans, who were magnificent. And kudos as always to NBC analyst Johnny Miller, the best in the business by about nine miles.
Less is More
The major broadcast network value proposition these days is as follows: you pay more money to advertise to fewer people. People like NBC's Jeff Zucker and Les (who cares about the CBS News brand?) Moonves maintain that this is a "win-win" situation. Finally, one brand (Mitsubishi Motor) has pulled the plug:
The major broadcast network value proposition these days is as follows: you pay more money to advertise to fewer people. People like NBC's Jeff Zucker and Les (who cares about the CBS News brand?) Moonves maintain that this is a "win-win" situation. Finally, one brand (Mitsubishi Motor) has pulled the plug:
Last week, the Mitsubishi Motor Company pulled every penny of its advertising from prime-time network shows, $120 million worth, because, as Ian Beavis, its senior vice president for marketing, put it, "There's nothing compelling in the new network programming."
Mr. Beavis, who said Mitsubishi would place more ads on cable and local television shows, as well as spend more on magazines and Internet sites, said he was just one of many advertisers expressing frustration with the networks.
"How long can you pay more for less?" he asked. "Someone has to finally say enough."
Saturday, September 18, 2004
The Dream Team
It was clear from the moment it was announced that pairing Tiger Woods with Phil (Mr. Callaway) Mickelson was a really bad idea and that it was. Team Europe thrashed the hapless Americans on Day One of the Ryder Cup. The hapless US television commentators reverted to "Monty the Great," by way of explanation, but it wasn't just Monty (great as he always is in Ryder Cup play). Darren Clarke, Sergio Garcia and especially Padraig Harrington were sensational.
Also sensational were the fans from Michigan. After the beery boorishness of Brookline in 1999, it was a welcome relief to hear the Michiganders applaud the fine play of the Euros while rooting hard for the home team.
It was clear from the moment it was announced that pairing Tiger Woods with Phil (Mr. Callaway) Mickelson was a really bad idea and that it was. Team Europe thrashed the hapless Americans on Day One of the Ryder Cup. The hapless US television commentators reverted to "Monty the Great," by way of explanation, but it wasn't just Monty (great as he always is in Ryder Cup play). Darren Clarke, Sergio Garcia and especially Padraig Harrington were sensational.
Also sensational were the fans from Michigan. After the beery boorishness of Brookline in 1999, it was a welcome relief to hear the Michiganders applaud the fine play of the Euros while rooting hard for the home team.
Wishing It Weren't So
Kausfiles has a funny bit about yesterday's Note from the political team at ABC News. One reason Real Clear Politics has become the best bookmark of the 2004 campaign is that they separate news aggregation from opinion.
Kausfiles has a funny bit about yesterday's Note from the political team at ABC News. One reason Real Clear Politics has become the best bookmark of the 2004 campaign is that they separate news aggregation from opinion.
Concerted Effort
Here's an excellent chronology of the CBS News-National Guard documents story from the always excellent Corante. One thing that the author leaves out of his time-line is that the 60 Minutes story was the linchpin of a post-GOP Convention "stop-the-Bush-bounce" counterattack by the DNC and the Kerry campaign.
The Boston Globe and The New York Times provided newspaper "stories" about Bush's National Guard service. 60 Minutes provided the crucial, prime-time television coverage. And the DNC ran an ad that "contexted" the issue. If you think this was not all of a piece, let me introduce you to a friend of mine in the real estate business.
Happily enough, we now know that on 2 September, in the early evening, someone faxed a copy of the fraudulent documents to CBS News from a Kinkos in Texas. There were six security cameras working at that Kinkos, so we will soon know the identity of the person who faxed the documents to CBS News. Once we know that, the rest will unravel.
Here's an excellent chronology of the CBS News-National Guard documents story from the always excellent Corante. One thing that the author leaves out of his time-line is that the 60 Minutes story was the linchpin of a post-GOP Convention "stop-the-Bush-bounce" counterattack by the DNC and the Kerry campaign.
The Boston Globe and The New York Times provided newspaper "stories" about Bush's National Guard service. 60 Minutes provided the crucial, prime-time television coverage. And the DNC ran an ad that "contexted" the issue. If you think this was not all of a piece, let me introduce you to a friend of mine in the real estate business.
Happily enough, we now know that on 2 September, in the early evening, someone faxed a copy of the fraudulent documents to CBS News from a Kinkos in Texas. There were six security cameras working at that Kinkos, so we will soon know the identity of the person who faxed the documents to CBS News. Once we know that, the rest will unravel.
Thursday, September 16, 2004
Fake But Accurate?
"In accordance with longstanding journalistic ethics, CBS News is not prepared to reveal its confidential sources or the method by which 60 MINUTES Wednesday received the documents."
Why not? The documnets are obviously fraudulent. CBS News has been badly tarnished as a result. I would think that someone at CBS or at Viacom would be ready to lynch whoever did this to CBS News. Any ethical obligation to the source, as emailer CM notes below, is forfeited if the documents are fraudulent.
Emailer CM is right about this. The identity of the source is the hinge of the story.
"In accordance with longstanding journalistic ethics, CBS News is not prepared to reveal its confidential sources or the method by which 60 MINUTES Wednesday received the documents."
Why not? The documnets are obviously fraudulent. CBS News has been badly tarnished as a result. I would think that someone at CBS or at Viacom would be ready to lynch whoever did this to CBS News. Any ethical obligation to the source, as emailer CM notes below, is forfeited if the documents are fraudulent.
Emailer CM is right about this. The identity of the source is the hinge of the story.
Wednesday, September 15, 2004
Endgame
Dear Mr. Ellis,
If CBS were to acknowledge the documents to be a forgery, then they could not claim ethical responsibility to protect their sources. Once implicated, the sources might further implicate those who encouraged them. Where would this lead?
Has any reporter ever gone to jail for protecting the source of a forged document? A document which the reporter himself acknolwedges to be false?
CBS will continue to maintain authenticity. They have no alternative. They have been very clearly advised on this by their attorneys.
The risk calculations are much different than for an ordinary news fraud. The business cost to CBS of acknowledging forgery could ultimately be much larger than mere damage to the brand. Think Arthur Andersen.
--CM
Dear Mr. Ellis,
If CBS were to acknowledge the documents to be a forgery, then they could not claim ethical responsibility to protect their sources. Once implicated, the sources might further implicate those who encouraged them. Where would this lead?
Has any reporter ever gone to jail for protecting the source of a forged document? A document which the reporter himself acknolwedges to be false?
CBS will continue to maintain authenticity. They have no alternative. They have been very clearly advised on this by their attorneys.
The risk calculations are much different than for an ordinary news fraud. The business cost to CBS of acknowledging forgery could ultimately be much larger than mere damage to the brand. Think Arthur Andersen.
--CM
Sunday, September 12, 2004
Pajama Party
So when does Dan Rather resign? The story he still insists is true has collapsed under sustained assault by the blogosphere. It appears that his most important media ally -- The New York Times -- has decided to cut its losses. And yet Rather continues to double down -- insisting even in private that the story is true.
What we are looking at here is a mini-Tailwind, politically-loaded fiction masquerading as "investigative journalism." Ordinarily, in situations like this, corporations move very quickly to isolate the damage and protect their brand image. A "producer" is fingered as the problem, a ritual sacrifice is held, appropriate apologies are offered, and the game begins anew.
Mr. Rather has put his CBS superiors in a very difficult place. By insisting that this phony story is true, he has denied them the easy damage control game plan. Indeed, he has put them in a nearly untenable position; they must choose between what the know to be true (that the story is phony and therefore damaging to the brand image of CBS News) and one of their largest investments (Rather himself).
At the end of the day (not that they give a damn about CBS News or journalistic integrity) they'll have to choose to defend the brand. Which means that the "damage" they will have to isolate is Rather himself. You can bet that tomorrow will not be a happy day at CBS Headquarters. A bunch of guys in pajamas have seen to that.
So when does Dan Rather resign? The story he still insists is true has collapsed under sustained assault by the blogosphere. It appears that his most important media ally -- The New York Times -- has decided to cut its losses. And yet Rather continues to double down -- insisting even in private that the story is true.
What we are looking at here is a mini-Tailwind, politically-loaded fiction masquerading as "investigative journalism." Ordinarily, in situations like this, corporations move very quickly to isolate the damage and protect their brand image. A "producer" is fingered as the problem, a ritual sacrifice is held, appropriate apologies are offered, and the game begins anew.
Mr. Rather has put his CBS superiors in a very difficult place. By insisting that this phony story is true, he has denied them the easy damage control game plan. Indeed, he has put them in a nearly untenable position; they must choose between what the know to be true (that the story is phony and therefore damaging to the brand image of CBS News) and one of their largest investments (Rather himself).
At the end of the day (not that they give a damn about CBS News or journalistic integrity) they'll have to choose to defend the brand. Which means that the "damage" they will have to isolate is Rather himself. You can bet that tomorrow will not be a happy day at CBS Headquarters. A bunch of guys in pajamas have seen to that.
Saturday, September 11, 2004
And That's The Way It Isn't
If you traveled in certain circles on the East Coast this past summer, the one story you heard over and over again was that Ben Barnes had the goods on George W. Bush's National Guard record and that CBS News was going to break the story on "60 Minutes." I must have heard this story four or five times, including once from an investment banker who claimed to have heard it from Barnes himself.
It is well known in Texas that Ben Barnes is not a guy you'd want to hang a story on, so to speak. And now it is well known that the CBS News piece that appeared on "60 Minutes" is based on fraudulent documents and patently false information. CBS News will have to disown this story soon because it just ain't true.
As, indeed, others are doing. The new tack is that Karl Rove created these forgeries; or less specifically, that they are a GOP dirty trick. Dan's a victim here, goes the new refrain. Among those offering this view is the Chairman of the Democratic National Committee. It's interesting to note that he spends most of his time denying that the Kerry campaign or the DNC or any of its affiliates had anything to do with the story.
Of course they did. Ben Barnes is a Kerry fund-raiser in Texas. Leading Democratic operatives had foreknowledge of this story as early as July and were telling friends (and even foes) about it back then. The notion that Karl Rove or Andy Card or Mary Matalin would forge National Guard documents, then secretly have them delivered to Ben Barnes so that he would then take them to Dan Rather so that "60 Minutes" would then do a piece that said that the President of the United States was a slacker who shirked his duty is......(how do I put this?)...... utterly deranged. And everyone knows it.
What we are looking at is a scandal, an attempt by the Democratic Party and a number of its news media megaphones to smear the President of the United States. This is potentially a big scandal; one that might do real damage to the Kerry campaign and cost Dan Rather and his producer their jobs.
But I doubt very seriously that Big Media will devote much, if any, energy to this story. They don't want to hurt Kerry and they really don't want to do anything that would damage CBS News. And they certainly don't want to help Bush in any way, shape or form.
Whether Big Media can make this story disappear is a challenge that the blogosphere will take up with gusto. I'm betting on the bloggers.
If you traveled in certain circles on the East Coast this past summer, the one story you heard over and over again was that Ben Barnes had the goods on George W. Bush's National Guard record and that CBS News was going to break the story on "60 Minutes." I must have heard this story four or five times, including once from an investment banker who claimed to have heard it from Barnes himself.
It is well known in Texas that Ben Barnes is not a guy you'd want to hang a story on, so to speak. And now it is well known that the CBS News piece that appeared on "60 Minutes" is based on fraudulent documents and patently false information. CBS News will have to disown this story soon because it just ain't true.
As, indeed, others are doing. The new tack is that Karl Rove created these forgeries; or less specifically, that they are a GOP dirty trick. Dan's a victim here, goes the new refrain. Among those offering this view is the Chairman of the Democratic National Committee. It's interesting to note that he spends most of his time denying that the Kerry campaign or the DNC or any of its affiliates had anything to do with the story.
Of course they did. Ben Barnes is a Kerry fund-raiser in Texas. Leading Democratic operatives had foreknowledge of this story as early as July and were telling friends (and even foes) about it back then. The notion that Karl Rove or Andy Card or Mary Matalin would forge National Guard documents, then secretly have them delivered to Ben Barnes so that he would then take them to Dan Rather so that "60 Minutes" would then do a piece that said that the President of the United States was a slacker who shirked his duty is......(how do I put this?)...... utterly deranged. And everyone knows it.
What we are looking at is a scandal, an attempt by the Democratic Party and a number of its news media megaphones to smear the President of the United States. This is potentially a big scandal; one that might do real damage to the Kerry campaign and cost Dan Rather and his producer their jobs.
But I doubt very seriously that Big Media will devote much, if any, energy to this story. They don't want to hurt Kerry and they really don't want to do anything that would damage CBS News. And they certainly don't want to help Bush in any way, shape or form.
Whether Big Media can make this story disappear is a challenge that the blogosphere will take up with gusto. I'm betting on the bloggers.
Sunday, September 05, 2004
Panic Watch
The house organ of the Democratic Party enters full panic mode this morning with this piece from Nagourney and company. No more wind-surfing! No more wind-surfing outfits! And lose the sun-glasses! Ellisblog thinks wind-surfing is responsible for half of Kerry's swoon.
The Gallup numbers should be out soon. This could lead to full panic meltdown mode. Remember the Iron Law of Conventional Wisdom: Whoever leads in the Gallup Poll on Labor Day wins the election.
The house organ of the Democratic Party enters full panic mode this morning with this piece from Nagourney and company. No more wind-surfing! No more wind-surfing outfits! And lose the sun-glasses! Ellisblog thinks wind-surfing is responsible for half of Kerry's swoon.
The Gallup numbers should be out soon. This could lead to full panic meltdown mode. Remember the Iron Law of Conventional Wisdom: Whoever leads in the Gallup Poll on Labor Day wins the election.
Wednesday, September 01, 2004
Twist and Shout!
The Kerry staff shake-up story is now official, thanks to the estimable Albert Hunt, former Washington Bureau Chief of The Wall Street Journal, whose sources inside both the Boston mafia and the national Democratic Party infrastructure are, let's just say, well-informed. Without further ado, let's go to the text of Mr. Hunt's blog-like "convention dispatch:"
Dispirited Democrats -- prominent senators, top fundraisers, even a few Kerry confidants -- have told the candidate, who is in Nantucket, that high-level changes are imperative. A few very well-connected Democrats report something will occur in the next few days. One person who might assume more control is Joe Lockhart, a former press secretary to Bill Clinton and a respected public-relations figure, but one who has almost no experience in the high-stakes world of presidential campaigns. Another possibility: veteran Democratic politico John Sasso, currently at the Democratic National Committee.
If there is a change -- Sen. Kerry privately is said to be "bouncing off the walls" in frustration -- it has to be imminent as the eight-week campaign is in full swing by Labor Day. "We have 48 hours," acknowledges an insider.
Do you suppose that one of those "very well-connected Democrats" might be...John Sasso? Do you suppose another might be Mr. William Daley? I do! I don't think Mr. Hunt would have written the above two paragraphs without having at least some sense that a "change" was coming. And I don't think he would have written it so urgently (his regular WSJ op-ed column appears on Thursdays, which is tomorrow), unless he felt that the news might break ahead of his Wednesday afternoon deadline.
Credit Mickey Kaus for moving this story along. Shortly after he arrived in New York, he began beating the drum. It's now the talk of the dispirited press herd here in Manhattan. The perfect press story for a GOP Convention; it allows them to talk to their Democratic friends and call it work.
Update: Senor Hunt is now backing away from his "convention dispatch" of yesterday with a new "convention dispatch" that says, essentially, never mind, it's just Joel Lockhart. Windsurf away!
The Kerry staff shake-up story is now official, thanks to the estimable Albert Hunt, former Washington Bureau Chief of The Wall Street Journal, whose sources inside both the Boston mafia and the national Democratic Party infrastructure are, let's just say, well-informed. Without further ado, let's go to the text of Mr. Hunt's blog-like "convention dispatch:"
Dispirited Democrats -- prominent senators, top fundraisers, even a few Kerry confidants -- have told the candidate, who is in Nantucket, that high-level changes are imperative. A few very well-connected Democrats report something will occur in the next few days. One person who might assume more control is Joe Lockhart, a former press secretary to Bill Clinton and a respected public-relations figure, but one who has almost no experience in the high-stakes world of presidential campaigns. Another possibility: veteran Democratic politico John Sasso, currently at the Democratic National Committee.
If there is a change -- Sen. Kerry privately is said to be "bouncing off the walls" in frustration -- it has to be imminent as the eight-week campaign is in full swing by Labor Day. "We have 48 hours," acknowledges an insider.
Do you suppose that one of those "very well-connected Democrats" might be...John Sasso? Do you suppose another might be Mr. William Daley? I do! I don't think Mr. Hunt would have written the above two paragraphs without having at least some sense that a "change" was coming. And I don't think he would have written it so urgently (his regular WSJ op-ed column appears on Thursdays, which is tomorrow), unless he felt that the news might break ahead of his Wednesday afternoon deadline.
Credit Mickey Kaus for moving this story along. Shortly after he arrived in New York, he began beating the drum. It's now the talk of the dispirited press herd here in Manhattan. The perfect press story for a GOP Convention; it allows them to talk to their Democratic friends and call it work.
Update: Senor Hunt is now backing away from his "convention dispatch" of yesterday with a new "convention dispatch" that says, essentially, never mind, it's just Joel Lockhart. Windsurf away!
Saturday, August 14, 2004
Making The Cut
Tiger Woods did it again yesterday at the PGA Championship. With six holes left to play and a Friday "trunk slam" staring him in the face, he carded three birdies and three pars to keep his extraordinary record of "made cuts" in tact.
"I saw a lot of you guys [reporters] coming out on the last few holes," said Woods, "and I just wanted to ruin your day. . . . I wasn't playing that well, so I had to somehow just grind it out, be patient and hopefully things would come around. And they did. . . . I think that's the one thing I'm most proud of." As well he might be.
The golfing press -- the largest collection of half-wits this side of the National Press Club in Washington -- had spent most of Friday gloating that Woods' "made cuts" streak was finally coming to an end. Oh well. Maybe next time.
Bob Costas, Mind Reader
NBC Olympics anchors Katie Couric and Bob Costas seemed fairly certain that the US team would not be well received by the huge crowd at last night's Opening Ceremonies in Athens. When Team USA was, in fact, greeted with a sustained and clamorous ovation, Mr. Costas sought to explain.
The Greeks, you see, can separate their love for the American people from the policies of the United States government. The warm reception they gave to Team USA should not in any way be construed as an endorsement of those policies.
Well thanks, Bob, for clearing that up. God forbid anyone might support the policies of the US government as it wages a global war against Islamic fascism. Mr. Costas's ability to read the minds of 75,000 people he's never met is remarkable. He has a big future as a political pundit.
Tiger Woods did it again yesterday at the PGA Championship. With six holes left to play and a Friday "trunk slam" staring him in the face, he carded three birdies and three pars to keep his extraordinary record of "made cuts" in tact.
"I saw a lot of you guys [reporters] coming out on the last few holes," said Woods, "and I just wanted to ruin your day. . . . I wasn't playing that well, so I had to somehow just grind it out, be patient and hopefully things would come around. And they did. . . . I think that's the one thing I'm most proud of." As well he might be.
The golfing press -- the largest collection of half-wits this side of the National Press Club in Washington -- had spent most of Friday gloating that Woods' "made cuts" streak was finally coming to an end. Oh well. Maybe next time.
Bob Costas, Mind Reader
NBC Olympics anchors Katie Couric and Bob Costas seemed fairly certain that the US team would not be well received by the huge crowd at last night's Opening Ceremonies in Athens. When Team USA was, in fact, greeted with a sustained and clamorous ovation, Mr. Costas sought to explain.
The Greeks, you see, can separate their love for the American people from the policies of the United States government. The warm reception they gave to Team USA should not in any way be construed as an endorsement of those policies.
Well thanks, Bob, for clearing that up. God forbid anyone might support the policies of the US government as it wages a global war against Islamic fascism. Mr. Costas's ability to read the minds of 75,000 people he's never met is remarkable. He has a big future as a political pundit.
The Laws of CW
I'm a little confused by Mark Halperin's assertion that the presidential race is now "Kerry's to lose." Isn't the Iron Law of Conventional Wisdom that "whoever leads in the Gallup Poll after Labor Day wins the election? " Isn't President Bush leading in the Gallup Poll now? Isn't it likely that President Bush's lead in the Gallup Poll will increase somewhat following the Republican National Convention and the 9/11 anniversary? If President Bush is up by, say, six in the Gallup Poll after Labor Day, won't he be the favorite to win in November?
(The answer to all these questions, in case you were wondering, is "yes.")
I'm a little confused by Mark Halperin's assertion that the presidential race is now "Kerry's to lose." Isn't the Iron Law of Conventional Wisdom that "whoever leads in the Gallup Poll after Labor Day wins the election? " Isn't President Bush leading in the Gallup Poll now? Isn't it likely that President Bush's lead in the Gallup Poll will increase somewhat following the Republican National Convention and the 9/11 anniversary? If President Bush is up by, say, six in the Gallup Poll after Labor Day, won't he be the favorite to win in November?
(The answer to all these questions, in case you were wondering, is "yes.")
Friday, August 13, 2004
First Day Stories
Are never the real story, of course. One suspects that Governor Jim McGreevey has long been aware that he was and is "a gay American." One further suspects that a certain New Jersey developer will rise to the surface of this tawdry tale in short order. And that what we learn as we go along will confirm all of our worst suspicions about New Jersey politics.
If you haven't read it, you must read today's McGreevey coverage in The New York Times. It is a mushy masterpiece of political correctness.
And while you are there, you might want to read the NYT's equally remarkable (for different reasons) piece on the UN's oil-for-food scandal. Apart from being about six months late to the story, the NYT somehow manages to not credit all of the hard work done on this story by other news organizations. Of course, the NYT never credits other news organizations in its pages (unless it absolutely has to), but in this case the omission is so egregious that it merits some kind of special prize for chutzpah.
Are never the real story, of course. One suspects that Governor Jim McGreevey has long been aware that he was and is "a gay American." One further suspects that a certain New Jersey developer will rise to the surface of this tawdry tale in short order. And that what we learn as we go along will confirm all of our worst suspicions about New Jersey politics.
If you haven't read it, you must read today's McGreevey coverage in The New York Times. It is a mushy masterpiece of political correctness.
And while you are there, you might want to read the NYT's equally remarkable (for different reasons) piece on the UN's oil-for-food scandal. Apart from being about six months late to the story, the NYT somehow manages to not credit all of the hard work done on this story by other news organizations. Of course, the NYT never credits other news organizations in its pages (unless it absolutely has to), but in this case the omission is so egregious that it merits some kind of special prize for chutzpah.
