Rathergate

(Image courtesy of InnWorldReport)

Watch Dan Rather's Statement on the 2004 Incident (CBS NEWS)

The Dan Rather-CBS scandal, also known as memogate or rathergate, of the 2004 election shook both the journalistic and political spheres at the time.

In 2004, CBS—anchored by Dan Rather—aired a story regarding President George W. Bush and his previous National Guard service. CBS claimed to have documents from his commanding officer, Lieutenant Colonel Jerry Killian, stating that President Bush was given special treatment during his time of service.

The documents had not been verified at the time of the broadcast—one month before the election was to take place. “News” quickly broke that the documents were falsified and that CBS was politically influenced in their report. When I say “news” I mean bloggers mostly from a conservative platform were the first to draw suspicion. Soon after the first reports, reporters and bloggers from all wings of the political spectrum started to question the validity of these documents.

The story resulted in the termination of four CBS employees, including Mary Mapes, the aggressive (alleged Kerry supporter) producer on the piece.

Dan Rather, at the time the most iconic figure in journalism, was forced to step down from his anchor position, even though he did no research on the actual story. His flaw was standing by the unsound piece for ten days after accusations started to circle.

The CBS-Dan Rather incident should serve as an example for all current and aspiring journalists. Reputation is everything, and credibility is priceless and fleeting.

Even if you are not the lead on a story, if your name—or face—is attached to it you are responsible and can suffer the full extent of consequences. Check and double check your facts; it is not only your responsibility as a journalist, but as a concerned American citizen. Rather was simply the face of the story, but his reputation was shattered due to his lack of personally validating the information.

This incident has other implications, other than the obvious ones of journalistic ethics. The media has a reputation of being politically one sided. And while we all have unavoidable bias, it is our job to put that aside for the sake of the facts. It is quite possible that the political biases of some on the story influenced their decision to not diligently check the facts and to rush it to air a month before the election.

The political reputations that suffered a hit from the story included more than George W. Bush, but also Senator John Kerry as well.

Ann Curry, of the Today Show, even stated during an interview” “Was CBS a pawn in a dirty tricks effort by the Kerry campaign to smear . . . President Bush? Can we go that far?” (quoted from the Colombia Journalism Review’s article “Blog Gate” by Corey Pein).

The social implications of rushing this story to air were not fully considered. As a voter, this concerns me that media would be so willing to air propaganda as news to possibly promote personal party affiliations.

The foundation of democracy is free speech and freedom of the press. Press founded on half truths, or unverified facts go against the very foundations of this country. Voters need accurate information to make well informed decisions that could affect the future of this country.

The sad truth is, we will never know if the documents were falsified or accurate. A piece of potentially breaking news was ruined with lack of effort and care. The lesson we can all learn from this is: be transparent, and verify, verify, verify. One small overlook can ruin a reputation which in turn can ruin a career.

For an interesting perspective on the incident visit the blog Rathergate which emerged at the time of the incident.