[lit-ideas] Re: Forged Documents
- From: Paul Stone <pas@xxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 13:46:53 -0400
At 01:30 PM 9/24/2004, you wrote:
>Andy wrote:
> >Best case scenario: CBS doesn't do its fact checking, publishes the
>documents
>
>ck: The mess up was on the part of CBS. Fifteen years ago, almost editor I
>dealt with, as a reporter, would have laughed in my face had I tried to get
>a newspaper to publish an assertion from a source whose materials I could
>not vouch for--in the context of ANY story. Journalists generally
>acknowledge that the state of their professional ethics is questionable, at
>this point, but could it be this dim? Yup, here it is. No conspiracy theory
>needed. OTOH, the news media casually publishes assertions by the likes of
>Swift Boats with such soft caveats that casual viewers, listeners, or
>readers might well assume the info has been properly vetted. Pathetic.
>Carol K.
Hell even our little town newspaper calls up people who write "letters to
the editor" and says "did you really write this?"
What I think is unbelievable in this case is that they interviewed the
little old lady (86 year old secretary) after the fact and she said
something to the effect "those are not authentic memos, but the sentiments
are the same as were going around at the time" as if that somehow gets the
forger and people who accepted the forgeries off the hook. This is
tantamount to planting evidence because you "know the guy is guilty."
I lost respect for Dan Rather when he started seething like a wild dog on
election night 2000 spewing all those incredible hokey expressions. Now,
he's like a weasel chasing a possum in a texas summer.
paul
##########
Paul Stone
pas@xxxxxxxx
Kingsville, ON, Canada
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
