Eminent Domain Stuff
New London Update (2/24/06)
Bad NLDC!
Coverage of the Rally at New London's City Hall (w/ pics)
Wednesday, September 15, 2004
Cut To The Chase
All right, I'm pretty much convinced that the CBS documents are fakes. The question is: What are the repercussions for CBS and Dan Rather?
There are, to my mind, a few possibilities.
1) Dan Rather resigns and CBS goes the way of the post-Jayson Blair NYT, which is to say slightly more sullied in the minds of those on the Right and still the Old Grey Lady to the Middle and Left.
2) Dan Rather stays at CBS (with some sort of admission of fault, if not guilt) and their journalistic reputation (as a news source) is somewhat tarnished but recovers because of the general short attention span of the country.
3) Dan Rather stays at CBS (without some sort of admission of fault, if not guilt) and their journalistic reputation is forever destroyed because the stonewalling only serves to breath new life into the story and cause more damage.
4) The whole dang thing blows over and the Liberals remain kissy-kissy with CBS for ever and ever amen.
I think we'll probably see something resembling #2...once CBS hops off their high horse and admits that they were taken for a seriously embarrassing ride.
One thing that's worth pointing out. Consider the bare bones of this story. Prominent public individual (PPI) says Proposition A (PA) is True. PA later turns out to be False. There is no reason to presume PPI knew of PA's falsehood at the time.
What is the public response once the truth comes out? Well, that all depends on whom PPI is and what PA is. Two scenarios:
Scenario #1:
PPI = Dan Rather
PA = Fake Memos
Response (from the Left) = "Eh, who cares?"
Scenario #2:
PPI = George W. Bush
PA = Pre-war evidence of WMD in Iraq
Response (from the Left) = "Liar! Liar! Liar! Liar! Liar! Liar! Hitler! Liar! Liar! Hitler!!! AAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!"
I think I've made my point.
|
There are, to my mind, a few possibilities.
1) Dan Rather resigns and CBS goes the way of the post-Jayson Blair NYT, which is to say slightly more sullied in the minds of those on the Right and still the Old Grey Lady to the Middle and Left.
2) Dan Rather stays at CBS (with some sort of admission of fault, if not guilt) and their journalistic reputation (as a news source) is somewhat tarnished but recovers because of the general short attention span of the country.
3) Dan Rather stays at CBS (without some sort of admission of fault, if not guilt) and their journalistic reputation is forever destroyed because the stonewalling only serves to breath new life into the story and cause more damage.
4) The whole dang thing blows over and the Liberals remain kissy-kissy with CBS for ever and ever amen.
I think we'll probably see something resembling #2...once CBS hops off their high horse and admits that they were taken for a seriously embarrassing ride.
One thing that's worth pointing out. Consider the bare bones of this story. Prominent public individual (PPI) says Proposition A (PA) is True. PA later turns out to be False. There is no reason to presume PPI knew of PA's falsehood at the time.
What is the public response once the truth comes out? Well, that all depends on whom PPI is and what PA is. Two scenarios:
Scenario #1:
PPI = Dan Rather
PA = Fake Memos
Response (from the Left) = "Eh, who cares?"
Scenario #2:
PPI = George W. Bush
PA = Pre-war evidence of WMD in Iraq
Response (from the Left) = "Liar! Liar! Liar! Liar! Liar! Liar! Hitler! Liar! Liar! Hitler!!! AAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!"
I think I've made my point.
|
