« Fischer to Iran: No More Mr. Nice Guy! | Main | Oh my God - Marc Pitzke Follows Medienkritik's Lead »


I'm leary of persuing this through legal or political means. I think the court of public opinion is good enough on this. If you start with lawsuits and congressional hearings, the MSM would fight back against the blogger "in pajamas" and that would drastically raise the cost of entry into blogging.

See this discussion in the Chicago Boyz for what could happen when MSM fights back.

How would they fight back...by beating us over the head with more forged documents? Please...don't make me laugh!

We have the legitimate right in our democracies to question a media that is biased and (as it appears in this case) outright lying to us. That should bring more (not less) people into blogging. We don't plan on letting big media off the hook and we don't fear the consequences of seeking the truth.

It is time to get to the bottom of this one way or the other. CBS owes us an explanation.

---Ray D.

Exactly so, Ray. The MSM must abide by the same rules of conduct it expects of others. Dan Rather must go. Now.

Nothing works so well as ridcule: I STRONGLY recommend the following:


Dan Rather's debacle, only shows the liberal left's fight against the G. W. Bush Administration, with Dan "Ranter"(Rather)and CBS at the forefront. It was "Dapper Dan" who released the infamous Abu Ghraib photos despite requests that he not do so. How many deaths have occurred since "Danny boy" released those photos? They were released only for sensationalism and to bring shame to the United States. Ole "Dano" has the same scruples as an old whorehouse madam, none. "Dan-Dan", as he is known to journalists who are still cutting their teeth, was an anti-war reporter in the sixties and seventies. Since when did he have any credibility to lose?

@N Hale

Abu Ghraib was also produced by Mary Mapes(She produced this scandal too). Wonder of Wonder Miracles of Miracles!?!?!

Too bad most Germans aren't religious. If I were one of the MSM mentioned on this site, I'd be praying my sheeple stay penned.

WOuldn't be the first time a revolution went back to the old country. And maybe this time, they'd get it right.

Has somebody already bought the rights of this C-BS story? If Hollywood would'nt be so liberal, one could make hilarious comedy out of it.

The Left seems to be more a religion than a political direction today. Just imagine the panic and the self-delusion in the C-BS editorial staff...

btw., there is a conservative film festival coming up in Dallas:


"We the People"? You actally wrote "We the People"?

Man, You guys rock big time.


Honestly! BIG TIME!

If I was to make up a bigger bunch of pompous fools... - no, it's not even possible to think about it... You, my Dear, manly, opinionated Real Guys have me well and truly stumped.

I give up. You win. Go ahead - take the swing... see what i care.

(And you smell bad, too!)

It gets even worse, guys. Today CBS News reported that the situation in Iraq is becoming very dangerous, that over 1,000 US troops have died there.

How the hell does CBS get away with this?

Ok Vic. You *do* non sequiter much. In fact, near as I can tell, all the time.

David and Ray

I watched for hours as no one posted to this thread. Until you, Ray. I can't speak for any American poster here, only for myself. You encouraged our support for our government's investigation of the press.

I think you miss something fundamental. Our press, as poorly as it usually performs, should be free of government intimidation.

Way back when, when I inquired on this thread about the feasibility of starting up a new media initiative in Germany, many German posters were very generous explaining to me how the current German press evolved from the parties/unions, post WWII.

Our press has evolved differently. As have our implementations of democracy. This is a very new phenomonem (I probably spelled that wrong)of the media and democracy for everyone in the USA. We're not quite sure what it all means.
But I, personally, am going to be very circumspect about mounting the battlements and calling for the government to invesitgate a news organization.

Laws have been broken, both at the state and Federal level. Personally, I would prefer to see the relevent issues addressed by the relevant law enforcement bodies instead of the United States government, in its political manifestation, calling for hearings on a free press.

A free press is free. Period. Whether or not it can be self-correcting remains to be seen.

But if it cannot, that still begs the question of wether or not I am a sentient being with the wherewhithal to learn and understand for myself.

Tough times without a crystal ball. I think I'll go shopping.

Marc Pitzke dazu:

Der Skandal um die vom US-Sender CBS präsentierten Nationalgarde-Akten lässt den Wahlkampf zur Farce verkommen. In Vergessenheit gerät, dass die Vorwürfe im Kern bestehen bleiben.


Was zu erwarten war: Fake but accurate. Für wie blöd hält man uns eigentlich...

The latest rasmussen poll stated that 27% believe the documents are authentic.

Hey Pamela,

Good point. However, I am not suggesting we use the government as a tool to intimidate the press. I think in this case, we have a particularly egregious case of forgery and falsification that could have had a major impact on the Presidential election and I think we ought to get to the bottom of who is behind that. I don't think Congress would be out of bounds to look into a matter like this.

My main point is that we need to hold our media accountable as consumers and citizens. When they lie to us and present us forgeries as "news" we need to make ourselves heard loud and clear: "We will not stand for this!"


Under English Common Law, Defamation and Libel were actionalbe torts, where the defamed party could sue the party that was spreading lies about them. This worked for 200 years. It is still in place in England. That is why there are so many lawsuits by celebrities in England against the Broad Sreet tabloids.

Here in the U.S., Sullivan v. The New York Times changed everything. The Supreme Court set up two standards: one for common people like ourselves, and one for public people.

Common people like ourselves can still sue under English common law. The standard of proof is that the other party told a lie about you and that you were damaged by this lie. Remember Richard Jewel, the security guard, who during the Atlanta Olympics, was blamed for the bombing. He sued ABC and won.

However, public people have a differnet standard. It no longer matters whether the lies are true or not. The standard of proof is whether the liar acted wontonly and willfully in publishing something about a public figure that was not true when he knew it was untrue.

With this standard, Dan Rather gets off Scott free. How can anyone prove that he willfully declared the Bush documents to be authentic?

Since Sullivan, the level of discourse against our public figures has worsen every year.

I, like you, do not belive in the Government getting involved with the press. But there has to be a better way of containing the press's boorishness when it comes to our public figures. This not only includes Bush, but people like Michael Jackson Kobe Bryant.

Ray D. If Congress investigates it will have an intimidating impact, regardless of the motives.

George M. You are correct about the libel laws. But given the document analysts who told them NOT to go with this story, the caveats told them by Killian's family, etc., I think you can make a very good case for "knew or should have known". Now, whether Killian's family has judicial standing to sue on behalf of the good name of a deceased family matter, I don't know.

But libel laws weren't what I had in mind. There are laws at both the state and Federal level on forgery and even more for forging military documents. So those get leveled at the forger. Additionally, depending on how CBS received each forged document: by fax is a violation of telecom law, by U.S. mail is another violation, etc., etc. And if CBS meets the standard of "knew or should have known", they are also liable under those same laws.

The comments to this entry are closed.


The Debate

Blog powered by Typepad

April 2023

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29