by James P. Pinkerton

September 21, 2004

These are the final days for Dan Rather. But the story of the fake documents
aired on "60 Minutes" is deeper than just one man's fall. It is the story of
technology's transition-and that's a tale that will never end.

By any fair reckoning, Rather should resign. As a big shot at CBS News-in
addition to being anchorman-in-chief, he has been the managing editor of the
CBS Evening News since March 1981-he deserves to be held to the same
standard as Howell Raines, the executive editor of The New York Times, who
was forced to resign last year in the wake of a news-fabrication scandal.

Some might argue that Rather was just a duped news reader, that he was
simply following orders. In which case, following the precedent established
in the 1998 "Tailwind" scandal-in which CNN's Peter Arnett was forced to
quit after he read phony copy about Americans using poison gas in
Laos-Rather should still be forced to take his leave.

But even if he limps along at CBS till the expiration of his contract in
2006, Rather is done for. He will be remembered as a reporter-crusader who
went chasing after the Big Story both courageously and recklessly. Whatever
the subject - hurricanes, Watergate, Afghanistan, George W. Bush - he was
always on a quest. And like Captain Ahab, the obsessive anti-hero of
Moby-Dick, Rather had many successes, but then he went harpooning after one
too many a whale.

But if whaling provided drama in the 19th century, the big events of that
era were elsewhere. The major purpose of whaling was to bring home
lubricants and fuel. But whales as the source were soon displaced by
petroleum; the modern industrial economy was born.

And so today, when Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Project for Excellence in
Journalism, speaks of "the end of the era of network news," his reference is
far more broad than just one man, or one scandal. He is speaking of the rise
of cable news; Fox, actually beat out the broadcast networks during the
Republican convention earlier this month.

In fact, cable of all kinds has been eating away at the traditional
oligopoly of VHF channels 2-13 for a couple decades now. Whereas once the
few UHF channels were a hard-to-reach province of snowy re-runs, today
hundreds of cable channels are as clear and reachable as anything on
broadcast.

So the "de-massification" of the media has been ongoing-and will keep going.
In the '90s, Internet-based news-most notably the Drudge Report, which burst
on the scene in 1998 by breaking the Monica Lewinsky story-proved that the
"new media" could blow past older media. And now we have even newer media:
the bloggers, the folks at home in their pajamas who collectively broke the
"Rathergate" story.

The two key concepts in this never-ending techno-saga are the increasing
ubiquity of Internet-based technology and the decreasing barriers to entry
into a public forum. That is, anybody with a computer and a modem can be a
blogger, and any blogger can be a media-player.

So what comes next? The past tells us that techno-change is tectonic change.
Prior to the 15th century, the Catholic Church maintained its monopoly in
part by controlling Bible production. Bibles were not only scarce but were
hand-scribed in Latin, which only priests could read.

Then came Johannes Gutenberg, who used movable type to mass-print Bibles,
eventually in local languages. Soon ordinary folk were reading the Bible for
themselves and thinking for themselves. Protestantism was born. What
followed was a century of religious war, but the world was transformed. One
of those transformations was the radical new reality that technology would
continue shaping events.

So today, Rathergate is just so much foam on the surface. The deep current
of our time is that the old networks have lost their power to a bunch of
scruffy no-names. Techno-change is shaping history yet again.
Copyright © 2004, Newsday, Inc.

"lsmyer" wrote in message
...
Copyright © 2004, Newsday, Inc.


Should you resign for posting copyrighted material?

--
McWebber
No email replies read
If someone tells you to forward an email to all your friends
please forget that I'm your friend.

Thank you, McWebber, for pointing out that I did indeed violate copyright
law. For some reason, I thought I could post an entire copyrighted article
as long as I gave credit to the author and its source, but after researching
fair use guidelines, I now realize that I was seriously in violation of
copyright law and should not have posted that article here.

Rather than make that mistake again, I will make sure that I will now post
links only to copyrighted works, and if I post an excerpt, then I will make
sure that the excerpt meets all fair use guidelines.

My apologies to Mr. Pinkerton and to Newsday, Inc.

In article ,
"lsmyer" wrote:

Thank you, McWebber, for pointing out that I did indeed violate copyright
law. For some reason, I thought I could post an entire copyrighted article
as long as I gave credit to the author and its source, but after researching
fair use guidelines, I now realize that I was seriously in violation of
copyright law and should not have posted that article here.

Rather than make that mistake again, I will make sure that I will now post
links only to copyrighted works, and if I post an excerpt, then I will make
sure that the excerpt meets all fair use guidelines.

My apologies to Mr. Pinkerton and to Newsday, Inc.

It is best to quote from an article and then a link to it. The quote
will be pertinent to the point you want to make and the link to the
whole article will fill people in that want to pursue it.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

I used to travel a Lot - gave me a whole new perspective on US reporting and
NEWS. It was amazing to be in Japan and hear a report on a current issue, then
in Europe and hear the same incident report, then back in US and again hear the
same incident reported.

Fox - USA Today - Internet - CBS, NBC - etc etc

What is true reporting of facts, what is spin, what is fabrication and
distortion - is this the $64K question today?

At this point I take any NEWS report with a huge grain of salt and do my own
research as best possible on issues I care about - still not likely to arrive at
the truth of situation, but is best I can do

lsmyer wrote:

by James P. Pinkerton

September 21, 2004

These are the final days for Dan Rather. But the story of the fake documents
aired on "60 Minutes" is deeper than just one man's fall. It is the story of
technology's transition-and that's a tale that will never end.


snip the rest

In article ,
"lsmyer" wrote:

by James P. Pinkerton

September 21, 2004

These are the final days for Dan Rather. But the story of the fake documents
aired on "60 Minutes" is deeper than just one man's fall. It is the story of
technology's transition-and that's a tale that will never end.

By any fair reckoning, Rather should resign.

Snip

Yes, and the producer of that show should be fired.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California