Dan Rather Warns of Media Control

Dan Rather at the 2012 ALA Annual Conference in Anaheim.

Dan Rather at the 2012 ALA Annual Conference in Anaheim.



Printer-friendly versionPrint

Veteran journalist and newscaster Dan Rather provided a little taste of the stories in his new book Rather Outspoken: My Life in the News at the Monday Association of Library Trustees, Advocates, Friends, and Foundations’ President’s Program, and warned of the increasing “dumbing down and trivialization” of the news.

Rather began by saying, “I think I am a pretty good storyteller. I should be, after more than 60 years as a reporter.”

What I attempt to do in this book is tell the kind of stories that I tell when I’m at ease with friends, family—maybe around the fireplace or around the campfire—and someone would say, ‘Dan what was it really like to cover Dr. Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement?’ or ‘What was Vietnam really like?’ or ‘Tell me about interviewing Saddam Hussein.’ These are stories that I tell at ease, and I wanted to put them between hard covers.”

Rather went on to address what he called the “elephant in the room”—that he had not left CBS “under the best of good circumstances.”

We had reported a true story, which did not sit well with the powers that be in Washington and corporate leadership decided to fold.” He described the dilemma of whether to write about his experience of reporting on George W. Bush’s service in the Texas Air National Guard, and said it ultimately was something he just had to include.

One of the threads woven through the book is my concern about the state of American journalism,” he said. “I have been very lucky here. What you’re looking at is a reporter who got lucky. That’s basically who I am and what I am.”

But the craft of journalism has changed over the years, not for the better,” he continued. “There has been a dumbing down, a trivialization of the news, and one of the reasons for that is the corporatization and the politicization of the news.”

Rather noted that not just journalists, but “every American citizen should care about it and here’s why. You know this, and you have since your 7th grade civics class—that a free and independent, truly independent (fiercely independent when necessary) press is the red, beating heart of democracy and freedom.”

Rather went on to describe how “a few, a very few, very large international corporations … control more than 80% of the true national distribution of news in the country. These big corporations, for whom news is only a small part of their business—they manufacture defense products and weapons, they run theme parks, they have all kinds of interests—this makes them dependent in large measure on whoever is in power in Washington.”

Putting it frankly, Rather said that these corporations “are in bed with big power in Washington … and they want the news reported in a certain way.”

No matter what one’s political orientation, Rather said, “I think we can all agree that we don’t want to have a few very large corporations, working in concert with a powerful political apparatus in Washington, deciding what we see, read, and hear—and they do, to a very large degree.”

Rather went on to say that this state of American journalism runs through the George W. Bush Texas Air National Guard story, and he emphasized that what he reported was a true story. One important fact, he added, was that Bush did benefit from his father’s influence to gain acceptance into what Rather called a “champagne unit” of the Texas National Guard—one way that those of privilege avoided being sent to Vietnam at the time—and noted that nobody has denied this fact. “The attack was on the process by which we got to the story.”

As he continued, Rather made it clear that “There is nobody who has more respect for the Office of the President than your speaker here,” and credited this value to his parents and his upbringing in a small Texas town.

Comments

What Dan Rather is saying

What Dan Rather is saying about the media being controlled by the powerful, is nothing new. When have been warned about this for at least four decades. What makes Dan Rather’s reporting different is the fact he is a respected journalist. He may have an axe to grind, but that doesn’t make his message any less true.

Media and Dumbing Down

What can be expected when so many today Tweet, text, Google, etc. we hve been dumbing down now for perhaps 2-3 generations. Dud?

Yet another academic study on media bias

So much for Rather’s concerns….

Overall, the major media outlets are quite moderate compared to members of Congress, but even so, there is a quantifiable and significant bias in that nearly all of them lean to the left,” said co‑author Jeffrey Milyo, University of Missouri economist and public policy scholar.”

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664….

Tim Groeling

Associate Professor, UCLA

Communication Studies Department

2322 Rolfe Hall

UCLA Box 951538

Los Angeles, CA 90095-1538

Office Phone: (310) 267-4646

groeling@ucla.edu

“Who’s the Fairest of them All? An Empirical Test for Partisan Bias on ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox News.” Presidential Studies Quarterly. 38: 631-657. 2008. [Wiley InterScience Links: pdf, html]

Media control from the left

Rather puts up the usual straw man about corporate control of the media; believe that if you want anecdotal evidence from a scorned former media superstar with an axe to grind. I am surprised he did not bring up “Citizens United” as well. Instead let’s look at a peer reviewed, tenured author who come up with a divergent conclusion about media influence:

http://www.timgroseclose.com/about-the-book/.

Dan Rather

Personally, being a Progressive— its we Progressive’s that got women the vote, blacks freed, ended the Depression by going to war against Fascism aka Naziism— I will say that Mr. (Professor?) Tim Roseclose is outside the socio-political mainstream of the general ALA membership. He is also skewed heavily to the Bible thumping rightwing America, stereotypically characterized as AM shock jock listeners who are against social change. (I say stereotypically because it’s not fair to say All conservative’s listen to and perhaps even worship Rush Limbaugh, and the like).
Anyway, enough of my bias. I remember hearing Dan Rather announce the tragic shooting of JFK and I remember his days reporting from the jungle firefights in Vietnam. But the bottom line is Mr. Bush was a terrible ignorant president who reaped the seeds sown by bad Clinton era policy and rode heard on the enduring national monetary crisis. He lied if only by omission about his one—two?—DUI’s and he fought an unnecessary war by charging it to the future. Unfunded and crippling to a generation of young men and women who too often return return terribly injured or mentally and emotionally damaged, needing a lifetime of care that, yes, has not been funded. Hospitals and medical staff not funded. Mr. Rather was only exposing one point of Mr. Bush’s deceit and infirmity. Mr. Rather like the man he worked with in the early days, Walter Cronkite, is a good decent man, intelligent and trustworthy. Mr. Bush, not so much.

in reply to anonymous: a

in reply to anonymous: a ‘peer-reviewed, tenured author’ is irrelevant to a (self?) published work, my friend. And in reading ‘About the Book’, the author’s bias (sweeping generalizations, etc.) is quite evident, not to mention the ‘brilliant’ PQ device, an extravagant pseudo-statistical (a double false, as it were) instrument that serves to support its false conclusion. THAT is a fallacy, my friend (as is ‘straw man’, but you apparently do not comprehend the term).

Harsh words, yes, but when you deride someone with a bit of integrity like Mr. Rather, you had better have some argument or valid point from which to speak. You did not; you do not. Consequently, you are now receiving a bit of backlash for your idiocy.