Exponent Watch
Re: Yuk It Up, All Right, Jewish Exponent, March 10, 2005, p. 7,

The March 10 "Media Clippings" concerning the retirement of Dan Rather, ignores his long and brilliant career in journalism. Instead, it dwells on the scandal surrounding the report on President Bush's military service. 

I wonder what makes this news worthy? Is there some Jewish or local angle that I do not perceive? Perhaps Robert Leiter feels that this issue was not adequate covered during the media saturation last September. While this was not a stellar moment for Dan Rather, CBS or journalism as a whole, it pays to have some perspective. The controversy concerned the authenticity of a printed document from an anonymous source. It was well understood that all credible witnesses agreed that the contents of the document were consistent with the thinking of Bush's commanding officer and the events at that time. 

The truthfulness of the contents of the document blinded CBS to the flaws of the typography of the document itself. It is hard to see how this document could have improved the Democratic prospects even had it been accepted which leads many people to suspect that Karl Rove was behind the document in the first place.

I sympathize with the Exponent's desire to point out media bias. However, if we wish to speak of media bias, there are more serious and more timely examples. For example, 

(1) Journalist Armstrong William who was paid over $250,000 to peddle "No Child Left Behind". 

(2) Journalists Maggie Gallagher and Mike McManus who got $21,500 and $10,000 respectively to advance Bush's ideas on marriage. 

(3) White House operative Jeff Guckert who infiltrated the Press Corps under the identity Jeff Gannon. 

(4) Considering the Jewish Exponent's charge to discuss issues of interest to the Jewish community, perhaps we should have seen a discussion of how a balanced piece from the Jewish Telegraphic Agency could be edited to remove all the pro-Democratic content while adding additional pro-Republican content without including any indication that the resulting piece no longer reflected the view of the supposed author

Note: This letter was published in the March 17, 2005 issue of the Jewish Exponent with the exception of those sections in bold which were edited out by the Jewish Exponent.

Current Issues * Feedback * About * Links * Masthead * Copyright * Advertising * ExponentWatch * Donate