Permit me literary license in changing the wording of an old adage to make it fit for this page. The adage states, “It doesn’t matter which of your shoes someone gets wet – your shoe has been made wet. And if you don’t clean it immediately it will ultimately smell like it has been made wet.”
Dan Rather and the CBS newsroom would do well to heed the advice inherent in the aforementioned maxim, pursuant to the imbroglio they find themselves in over the presumably forged (and discredited) memos pertaining to the president’s National Guard service.
For the record, I do not believe for a moment that Rather, with full knowledge, knowingly did his (now infamous) “60 Minutes” piece with forged documents. I do however believe that somewhere in the corner of his mind, professional experience and common sense triggered cautionary warnings that he chose to overlook.
Notwithstanding, someone got Rather’s shoe wet and it is now smelling to high heaven. Accordingly, I like many am of the opinion it is time he and CBS show some of the environmental concern liberals are known for, by taking the necessary steps to clear the polluted air that is asphyxiating the station.
I submit this is a more prudent course of action than his looking like a deer caught in the lights of an impending locomotive, while trying to convince the public to focus on the allegations juxtaposed to the almost certainly forged documents. And the place to start is with the producer of the “60 Minutes” piece, Mary Mapes.
Rather is a talking head. He (no doubt) without question doesn’t view himself as such, but bottom line, that’s all he is. As are 99 percent of the news anchors and show hosts.
It is the producers who interview prospective guests. Producers ask the questions and bring together a show. The producer for all intensive purposes puts the show together, then hands it off to the host – who then mounts his ivory chair, stares into the camera and with acting ability rivaling the late John Barrymore proceeds to convince the viewing audience they know not that of which they speak.
Producers many times on their own – but always with a mind for the host’s political proclivities – pre-interview potential guests, searching for responses and angles that will work well with the host’s point of view.
Herein lie two major problems. One is that the idea behind reporting the news is just that – reporting the news. It is not to make the news or become the news.
The other is asking newsworthy questions – not biased, leading ones. And chief among them in shows like Rather’s is to ask the guest if they have a political ax to grind. Said information should be made clear to the viewing public, so they are then able to determine for themselves the depth of credibility of the guest.
My opinion is that Rather’s producer bears no small amount of responsibility for the teeming caldron he and CBS News now find themselves in. In expressing this, however, I am in no way minimizing Rather’s culpability in this brouhaha. He as a professional is responsible for the final product. It is he who should without fail always proof the producers work, because it is his name, credibility and reputation that is on the line. Not to mention that of his employer. To shrink from this responsibility and /or to allow the airing of such an obvious hatchet piece is unworthy of his self-professed integrity.
It is also diabolically unfair to those responsible for his salary – namely the sponsors, and to the public which dares to believe they are receiving accurate and unbiased news.
Herein stands the elephant in the middle of the room they choose to ignore, while expressing consternation at being exposed.
Unless and until Rather and company come completely clean, the stench from his wet shoe will continue fouling the air of long ago presumed true and accurate reporting.
But, then again, the liberal elites – not unlike those from another country who believe frequent baths can be omitted through the proper application of perfume – see no reason to wash their soiled feet when they believe the proper application of casting aspersions elsewhere serves the same purpose.
