Dan pursues CBS aggressively
I’ve been following the Dan Rather saga ever since my news intakeÂ of the 2004 US elections was rudely interrupted by this weird thingy called blog opinion. I followed it so much that I even did a dissertation on what has since become known as Rathergate and followed that up with an exclusive interview with the instigator of it all, the incomparable Harry MacDougald (click on the link on the right or here)
When I started on this journey I felt a considerable lack of sympathy for Dan Rather . . . Of course he was duped by a weirdo with an agenda but he was the USA’s top-dog journalist, the man not just with the questions but often with the answers, if Dan said something then the US believed it. Of course his producer Mary Mapes and her assistants didn’t help but, as many have pointed out, Dan should have questioned the memos. He should at the very least have been suspicious. He shoulda twigged. Alas, the problem with Rathergate wasn’t that Bill Burkin’s fake documents were just too good not to print, it was that the wily Burkin made them fit the profile exactly of what an exclusive-hungry CBS anchorman would want.
Following last week’s news that Dan is nowÂ resurrecting the whole sorry saga in a $70m lawsuit against his former employer, I now feel real sadness. Even if he wins (does he need the dough?) it will be Pyrrhic.
According to the above-linked NYTimes article Dan says:
“I’dd like to know what really happened”, he said, his eyes red and watering. “Let’s get under oath. Let’s get e-mails. Let’s get who said what to whom, when and for what purpose.”
Who said what to whom? Dude, all anyone interested in Rathergate needs toÂ do is click here, it’s all there in black and white . . . just like those memos.
It’s sad that after 3 years Dan hasn’t realised that.