Rather Redux

Let’s take a break from all the heavy breathing over John Kerry’s performance at the first debate (I notice no one is talking about the substance of his remarks, but that’s another blog).

Dan Rather is back in the news, this time with his two “competitors” from the older networks. Peter Jennings and Tom Brokaw have come to the defense of their colleague, citing such nostrums as, "I don't think you ever judge a man by only one event in his career," (Jennings), and condemning “a kind of political jihad ... that is quite outrageous," (Brokaw).

Funny, I don’t remember Peter voicing that sentiment about Martha Stewart, and she’s doing time. This is not one event in Rather’s career, any more that Monica Lewinsky was one event in Clinton’s career. What those two have in common is that for each it was the one event that defied prevarication and stonewalling, because both turned out to be incontestably true. Several examples of Dan Rather’s use of questionable authenticity have been raised in the past, but have always been met by the press’s version of stonewalling, “we stand by our story.” What about Spiro Agnew? He only got caught once.

With regard to Brokaw's comment, hoisting Rather by his own petard is just desserts, not political jihad. Somehow I don’t think Tom would have accepted such shoddy reporting and questionable evidence if it had been in defense of President Bush. Let’s remember that Tom Brokaw is the kind of discerning intellectual who has said he maintains course by steering between his friends who think he is too liberal, and those who think the opposite.

Tom, maybe you need a wider set of friends.