Professional journalists react to Dan Rather lawsuit

With Dan Rather's lawsuit underway, journalists all around the country are jumping at the chance to comment on the story, including the professionals from the Mass Communication Department at SHSU.

By Patrice Holmes


In September, anchor and well-respected journalist Dan Rather filed a lawsuit against CBS, its corporate parent and three of his former superiors, including Sumner M. Redstone, the executive chairman of CBS. After his role in an unsupported report questioning President Bush’s Vietnam-era National Guard service, his career at CBS News came to an end in March 2005.

Rather, now 75 said that the network violated his contract by giving him insufficient airtime on “60 Minutes” after forcing him to step down as anchor of the “CBS Evening News”.

With all the attention and concern surrounding the lawsuit, some professionals are looking at Rather in a different light. While some maintain that he is a great journalist and a man to be admired in the industry due to his long years covering the top news stories of our time, some argue that he has fallen from grace and mad a mistake that cost him is credibility and admire respect.

At Sam Houston State University’s Mass Communications department named in honor of Rather, several professors who have worked in the industry and witnessed his accomplishments and down fall, spoke out on the lawsuit and the effects it has had on him in the professional community.

Mickey Herskowitz, Warner Endowed chair in the mass communications department, said that he was stunned to hear of the lawsuit.

“I was initially surprised that Dan was willing to take such a risky step- it isn’t a walk in the park to sue people who can keep you in court for years,” Herskowitz said.
Herskowitz added that he admired him for doing what he believed was right and acting on his principle. Like Herskowitz, Patsy Ziegler, professor of journalism, said she thought Rather needed to speak out if he felt he was wronged.

“I felt he had a right to pursue vindication of the professional cloud CBS put under him,” Ziegler said.

Others do not share their reactions. Mike Blackman, also a Warner Endowed Chair, dissatisfied with Rather’s actions and the scandal at CBS.
“I was disappointed to see the grand legacy of CBS News and their distinguished reporter/anchorman collide in court.”

Rather has made it clear that he wanted justice for the actions of CBS in regards to his career. Rather said he had been unable to let go of numerous lingering questions about the Guard report and CBS’s handling of its fallout. He said he had even assembled “a team” of associates at his own expense — he declined to say whether it included private investigators — that had turned up new information. Among his findings, he said, was that a private investigator hired by CBS after the report’s broadcast had unearthed evidence that might exonerate him, at least in part.

“I’d like to know what really happened,” he said, his eyes red and watering. “Let’s get under oath. Let’s get e-mails. Let’s get who said what to whom, when and for what purpose.”

Rather’s reasons for filing often have the public wonder if it was right. He has always made it clear that he wanted to know why the issue was taken to this point. Ziegler said that she feels he has a right to challenge CBS because it brought his character and integrity into question. Herskowitz concurs, saying that CBS broke agreements.

“When Dan stepped down as anchor of the Evening News, promises were made and not kept. Dan was cast aside and ignored, which is hardly appropriate treatment for someone who had served the network for well over 40 years,” Herskowitz said.

Herskowitz added that for nearly 14 years, CBS had the top rated news cast. Their decline was due primarily to the loss of affiliate stations, not to the public’s dislike for Rather.

The suit, which seeks $70 million in damages, $20 million in compensatory damages and $50 million in punitive damages, names as defendants CBS and its chief executive, Leslie Moonves; Viacom and its executive chairman, Mr. Redstone; and Andrew Heyward, the former president of CBS News.

In a statement CBS said, “These complaints are old news and this lawsuit is without merit.” Mr. Heyward and Viacom had no comment beyond the CBS statement.

In the suit, filed in State Supreme Court in Manhattan, Mr. Rather charges that CBS and its executives made him “a scapegoat” in an attempt appease the Bush administration.  

For both Mr. Rather and CBS, the filing of the suit threatens to once again focus attention on one of the darker chapters in the history of the network and its storied news division, at a moment when its flagship evening news program continues to lag; and Blackman agrees.

“Regardless of the outcome of the case, I can’t see either party emerging with an enhanced reputation.”  

Rather’s reputation has taken a hit since the “Rathergate” incident. While some maintain that he made an honest mistake and him name should hold the journalistic weight it always has, other believe that he got what he deserved and should be held to a higher standard because of his background in the news business. Blackman said that since Rather was such an established, aggressive and courageous journalist; this mistake cannot outweigh his contributions to the field.

“Mr. Rather has a long record of excellent work having distinguished himself as a top notch, thoughtful energetic and brave reporter and iconic anchorman. I don’t think one mistake erases a career of solid work,” Blackman said. While it is clear that Rather has done what most journalists can only dream, Ziegler believes that this event has hurt him in the journalism community. “His professional reputation has suffered from the degradation. He is now not nearly as mainstream as he was in the CBS anchor chair,” she said.

Rather said was little more than a narrator of the disputed broadcast, which was shown on Sept. 8, 2004, on the midweek edition of “60 Minutes” and which supposed to offer new evidence of preferential treatment given to Mr. Bush when he was a lieutenant in the Air National Guard.  And since he played a relatively small roll in the acquisition and dissemination of the news story, he feels CBS’s actions were unwarranted.

Rather says in the filing that he allowed himself to be reduced to little more than a patsy in the furor that followed, after CBS concluded that the report had been based on documents that could not be authenticated. Under pressure, Mr. Rather says, he delivered a public apology on his newscast on Sept. 20, 2004 — written not by him but by a CBS corporate publicist — “despite his own personal feelings that no public apology from him was warranted.”

The portrait of Mr. Rather that emerges from the 32-page filing bears little resemblance to his image as a hard-charging newsman. Although he may be seen in a more tarnished sense now, the three Sam Houston professors concur that his standing as one of America’s top journalists still stands.

“To people that know him best, even his former network rivals, viewed him with nothing but respect and even awe for his work ethic and unrelenting energy in pursuing a story,” Herskowitz said. “I can’t think of a better role model for a young journalist. He earned every inch of his way and climbed the ladder one rung at a time. His honesty and hard work cannot be doubted.”

Links

More on Dan Rather - "A look at Dan Rather's School Days"

The story that started it all - "'Rathergate' leads to lawsuit"

The $70 million lawsuit - "Dan Rather sues CBS over story"

Reaction from professionals - "Professional journalists react to Dan Rather lawsuit "

Reaction from SHSU students and alumni - "Students/Alumni reflect on Dan Rather lawsuit"

A look at Investigative Journalism - "Investigative Journalism on the decline?"