Certainly, I write this with a libertarian's bias...but I'm curious what your thoughts are...certainly, this story would not have blown up without the convergence of the Internet and news media.
disaffiliates.blogspot.com/2004....html
Dan Rather is an early casualty in the war over truth in reporting
There is a war under way for truth in reporting and a defiant Dan Rather is about to become one of the first foot soldiers fighting for Big Media to go down. It is quickly becoming common knowledge that Dan Rather and CBS’s 60 Minutes rushed to judgment regarding the authenticity of Texas National Guard documents potentially damaging to President Bush’s reelection campaign. Rather has unapologetically defended the report, seemingly oblivious to the magnitude of his error and the damage it is going to cause CBS. The fact that Americans are more and more concerned about the authenticity and implications of the 60 Minutes report than the content of the documents is evidence that accuracy in reporting is the big story of this election session.
Ten years ago, the 60 Minutes story most likely would have caused its political damage without challenge. Those with legitimate questions over the authenticity of the documents did not have the ability to reach a wide enough mass of people to matter. Information travels so quickly today that, thanks to Matt Drudge, millions of Americans were hours ahead of the major news networks on this story, all wondering loudly through their own outlets (blogs, websites, et al) why no one was reporting this breakthrough.
The battle lines of this very public battle are drawn and the number of casualties is striking and rapidly on the rise. On the offensive are citizens who desire truth in reporting, many of whom are only recently realizing that the media they grew up respecting may not be worthy of their trust. Entrenched and on the defensive are the Dan Rathers of the world – the media elite.
Books exploring bias in the media have repeatedly reached the tops of the charts over the past few years. Websites devoted to debunking misinformation and exposing bias are spouting up every day. The clear majority of Americans no longer trust Big Media to report the truth. Now that there are thousands upon thousands of alternative sources to read and interpret the news, Big Media’s days are numbered.
The fall from grace has been in the works for years, but is accelerating as more people come to understand the power of the Internet for news gathering and fact checking. The NY Times started crumbling under the weight of the Jayson Blair scandal and internal squabbles over the future direction of the grey lady have been embarrassingly public. USA Today has suffered material damage through the exploits of Steven Glass, while hints of deeper troubles within the nation’s most popular newspaper were exposed. The once revered Boston Globe has taken a beating for its similar penchant for publishing falsities. 60 Minutes will never again garner the audience it once enjoyed. Dan Rather is offending millions who will never believe him again. Certainly, lies and distortions have existed since people started reporting the news; but now there is a way to expose cheaters and counter-balance the damage.
In the information age, where news and data flows to tens, thousands, or potentially millions of discerning citizens at the click of a mouse, getting away with a lie is infinitely more challenging than it ever was. Cheats, liars, and media monopolies beware!
disaffiliates.blogspot.com/2004....html
Dan Rather is an early casualty in the war over truth in reporting
There is a war under way for truth in reporting and a defiant Dan Rather is about to become one of the first foot soldiers fighting for Big Media to go down. It is quickly becoming common knowledge that Dan Rather and CBS’s 60 Minutes rushed to judgment regarding the authenticity of Texas National Guard documents potentially damaging to President Bush’s reelection campaign. Rather has unapologetically defended the report, seemingly oblivious to the magnitude of his error and the damage it is going to cause CBS. The fact that Americans are more and more concerned about the authenticity and implications of the 60 Minutes report than the content of the documents is evidence that accuracy in reporting is the big story of this election session.
Ten years ago, the 60 Minutes story most likely would have caused its political damage without challenge. Those with legitimate questions over the authenticity of the documents did not have the ability to reach a wide enough mass of people to matter. Information travels so quickly today that, thanks to Matt Drudge, millions of Americans were hours ahead of the major news networks on this story, all wondering loudly through their own outlets (blogs, websites, et al) why no one was reporting this breakthrough.
The battle lines of this very public battle are drawn and the number of casualties is striking and rapidly on the rise. On the offensive are citizens who desire truth in reporting, many of whom are only recently realizing that the media they grew up respecting may not be worthy of their trust. Entrenched and on the defensive are the Dan Rathers of the world – the media elite.
Books exploring bias in the media have repeatedly reached the tops of the charts over the past few years. Websites devoted to debunking misinformation and exposing bias are spouting up every day. The clear majority of Americans no longer trust Big Media to report the truth. Now that there are thousands upon thousands of alternative sources to read and interpret the news, Big Media’s days are numbered.
The fall from grace has been in the works for years, but is accelerating as more people come to understand the power of the Internet for news gathering and fact checking. The NY Times started crumbling under the weight of the Jayson Blair scandal and internal squabbles over the future direction of the grey lady have been embarrassingly public. USA Today has suffered material damage through the exploits of Steven Glass, while hints of deeper troubles within the nation’s most popular newspaper were exposed. The once revered Boston Globe has taken a beating for its similar penchant for publishing falsities. 60 Minutes will never again garner the audience it once enjoyed. Dan Rather is offending millions who will never believe him again. Certainly, lies and distortions have existed since people started reporting the news; but now there is a way to expose cheaters and counter-balance the damage.
In the information age, where news and data flows to tens, thousands, or potentially millions of discerning citizens at the click of a mouse, getting away with a lie is infinitely more challenging than it ever was. Cheats, liars, and media monopolies beware!
posted by:
|
New York City
|
-
Re: dan rather and big media
Mon, September 20, 2004 - 10:41 AMit is unfortunate, and will probably, as did that case at the NY Times w/ the reporter who faked all those stories, lead to self-censorship. That would be the worst, i think; not just a network losing face and integrity, but a media culture too afraid to poke around that nobody ever gets at the truth. Small-time outlets may have the Net, but who trusts what comes across the Net till it's verified by a legitimate enterprise?
and then at the same time, it seems according to recent polls that we expect there to be a bit of lying and cover up. that Kerry's not entirely honest about the Nam boat incident; that Bush's not entirely honest about his Guard service...
is it a matter of degree?
if it is, then it's a sign we've lost our principles..
sound off? -
-
Re: dan rather and big media
Tue, September 21, 2004 - 7:44 AMMy suspicion (since the initial story first broke) was that this was a planted story, engineeered by Karl Rove. The "delinquency" was not one that most civilians would get up set about (so no major hit), and the "discovery" of the forgery would innoculate Bush against the possibility that real documents might surface.
Finally, the discussion has reduced the amount of substantive discussion of other Bush problems by the media.
The trashing of CBS/Rather (and the increased paranoia of mainstream media) is a bonus that KR might have hoped for, but not counted on. -
-
Re: dan rather and big media
Mon, September 27, 2004 - 4:07 PMI very well think they could be planted docs as well by the Bush team (or someone related to the team) --- but why did they go ahead with the story??
To answer the above - indeed, people desire verifcation and trusted sources - I think we will seek those out over the next few years (many of whom will be borne out of the web) - there is a disruption currently going on - but that is exciting stuff..and a net positive for truth.. -
-
Re: dan rather and big media
Wed, October 6, 2004 - 7:42 AMYou're right that people seek verification and trust. The problem starts with what people trust, and how they (or dont) obtain verification.
In terms of trust, they value connection/familiarity over facticity, objectivity, etc. E.g. relationships win over content because we relate to people better than anything, and have the ability to make intuitive impressions of people in f2f.
In terms of verification, we all have only inadequate means by which to check the facts. The mediaverse is rife with sophistry...
-
-
-
