Comments on: CBS Rathergate Response: Posturing or Substance? http://www.contentious.com/2005/01/15/cbs-rathergate-response-posturing-or-substance/ Amy Gahran's news and musings on how we communicate in the online age. Thu, 04 Dec 2008 07:31:16 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Rod Stanton http://www.contentious.com/2005/01/15/cbs-rathergate-response-posturing-or-substance/#comment-10202 Rod Stanton Thu, 27 Jan 2005 10:04:13 +0000 #comment-10202 Rathergate has had a big impact on both "journalism" and blogs. Negative on "journalism" and positive on blogs. Rathergate has had a big impact on both “journalism” and blogs. Negative on “journalism” and positive on blogs.

]]> By: Paul Lewis http://www.contentious.com/2005/01/15/cbs-rathergate-response-posturing-or-substance/#comment-10050 Paul Lewis Wed, 26 Jan 2005 01:47:10 +0000 #comment-10050 In the old days of television and newspaper journalism, the journalist had, at the very least, to take an elevator to the paper/network's library, or better, go out and scrounge around other sources, to find "the truth." The "truth" is something that's been, in my humble opinion, laid by the wayside; on all sides of the fence (I'm a moderate republican who can't stand the comingling of religion and government, just to qualify). To finish, how tempting it must be for these assistant producers to merely order-in a deli sandwich and sit at their computers, deftly doing research, and counting on the majority of what they come up with to be valid. Perhaps the electronic device that would have best been used by these staffers would've been the telephone. I'd like to hear from anyone who takes issue with my opinion; I'd like very much to believe that there are reliable, accurate and fair sources of information to be found on the internet. In the old days of television and newspaper journalism, the journalist had, at the very least, to take an elevator to the paper/network’s library, or better, go out and scrounge around other sources, to find “the truth.” The “truth” is something that’s been, in my humble opinion, laid by the wayside; on all sides of the fence (I’m a moderate republican who can’t stand the comingling of religion and government, just to qualify). To finish, how tempting it must be for these assistant producers to merely order-in a deli sandwich and sit at their computers, deftly doing research, and counting on the majority of what they come up with to be valid. Perhaps the electronic device that would have best been used by these staffers would’ve been the telephone. I’d like to hear from anyone who takes issue with my opinion; I’d like very much to believe that there are reliable, accurate and fair sources of information to be found on the internet.

]]> By: Doug http://www.contentious.com/2005/01/15/cbs-rathergate-response-posturing-or-substance/#comment-7893 Doug Sun, 16 Jan 2005 01:44:02 +0000 #comment-7893 <i>It’s not necessarily about negligence or a hidden agenda.</i> I would agree, but only because I think that the agenda of CBS is anything but hidden. As an admittedly staunch conservative Republican I have strong feelings/suspicions as to the motives of Dan Rather, Mary Mapes, etc. I think it is quite obvious what they were trying to do with the Bush-National Guard story. Much like the anti-Kerry pieces that FoxNews ran (albeit without forged documents), the motives of Rather & Co. were clearly political. Nonetheless, your analysis of the situation is the best I've read so far. By ignoring the political aspect of the scandal and focusing on what it is says about the relationship of blogs and traditional news organizations some fascinating points were made. My favorites: <i>The perception of credibility is another matter. Too often in the media landscape, perceived credibility gets equated with the size of an organization. That’s a fallacy.</i> and <i>Bloggers can be journalists, too. You might also consider, are traditional news organizations a reliable source for bloggers? It cuts both ways.</i> Well said. It’s not necessarily about negligence or a hidden agenda.

I would agree, but only because I think that the agenda of CBS is anything but hidden.

As an admittedly staunch conservative Republican I have strong feelings/suspicions as to the motives of Dan Rather, Mary Mapes, etc. I think it is quite obvious what they were trying to do with the Bush-National Guard story. Much like the anti-Kerry pieces that FoxNews ran (albeit without forged documents), the motives of Rather & Co. were clearly political.

Nonetheless, your analysis of the situation is the best I’ve read so far. By ignoring the political aspect of the scandal and focusing on what it is says about the relationship of blogs and traditional news organizations some fascinating points were made.

My favorites:

The perception of credibility is another matter. Too often in the media landscape, perceived credibility gets equated with the size of an organization. That’s a fallacy.

and

Bloggers can be journalists, too. You might also consider, are traditional news organizations a reliable source for bloggers? It cuts both ways.

Well said.

]]>