# Dan Rather Files $70M Suit Against CBS
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832
**Category:** The BBQ Pit
**Created:** [September 20, 2007, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832 "2007-09-20T02:54:32Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Plan\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plan_B)
#### Post date: [September 20, 2007, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/1 "2007-09-20T02:54:32Z")
[http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hUVO6cyEPAt-CaWVsvqXELJ0\_DCw](http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hUVO6cyEPAt-CaWVsvqXELJ0_DCw)
Apparently Dan Rathers is pissed off about the way CBS treated him after he got caught faking the evidence in a story about GWB. I hope the trial drags on for a long, long time and we find out all the dirty secrets about what goes on in CBS News.
---
### Author:  [@ASAKMOTSD](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ASAKMOTSD)
#### Post date: [September 20, 2007, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/2 "2007-09-20T02:57:10Z")
So because Dan Rather did his job - reading the news stories prepared by others - he was somehow responsible for “faking” something? Explain?
I’d be pissed off, too…
---
### Author:  [@Plan\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plan_B)
#### Post date: [September 20, 2007, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/3 "2007-09-20T13:08:22Z")
[QUOTE=ASAKMOTSD]
So because Dan Rather did his job - reading the news stories prepared by others - he was somehow responsible for “faking” something? Explain?
I’d be pissed off, too…
[/QUOTE]
As I said, I’d love for the details to come out about who does exactly what at CBS and all that. If in fact he’s just been a news reader that would be great to know. They’ve always given the impression that anchors have a lot of power to determine what stories run and how.
---
### Author:  [@Hampshire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hampshire)
#### Post date: [September 20, 2007, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/4 "2007-09-20T13:22:28Z")
I predict this suit gets thrown out real fast.
Network contracts pretty much give the network the option to get rid of you whenever they want, for whatever reason they want, or with no reason at all.
I don’t see him having a leg to stand on.
---
### Author:  [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)
#### Post date: [September 20, 2007, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/5 "2007-09-20T13:58:51Z")
Can’t remember who in blogland pointed this out, but one would think that, if Rather cared more about his reputation than the prospect of winning some moolah, he’d never file this suit. Everyone’s always thought of him as a newsman, for better or worse, rather than a pretty face reading someeone else’s words. The premise of his suit is that he was the latter rather than the former, and that’s admitting to a big step down.
---
### Author:  [@yanceylebeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yanceylebeef)
#### Post date: [September 20, 2007, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/6 "2007-09-20T14:03:24Z")
[QUOTE=Plan B]
As I said, I’d love for the details to come out about who does exactly what at CBS and all that. If in fact he’s just been a news reader that would be great to know. They’ve always given the impression that anchors have a lot of power to determine what stories run and how.
[/QUOTE]
Of course he is a news reader. He was doing stories for CBS news, 60 Minutes 2 and 48 hours. No on, and I mean no one, would be expected to write all of the things he was doing.
He has producers, directors, writers, editors and cameramen.
Did you actually think the entire newscast rest on his shoulders?
---
### Author:  [@Lady\_Eboshi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lady_Eboshi)
#### Post date: [September 20, 2007, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/7 "2007-09-20T16:32:06Z")
[QUOTE=yanceylebeef]
Did you actually think the entire newscast rest on his shoulders?
[/QUOTE]
No, but I would not be surprised if HE does.
---
### Author:  [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)
#### Post date: [September 20, 2007, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/8 "2007-09-20T18:24:50Z")
[QUOTE=yanceylebeef]
Of course he is a news reader. He was doing stories for CBS news, 60 Minutes 2 and 48 hours. No on, and I mean no one, would be expected to write all of the things he was doing.
He has producers, directors, writers, editors and cameramen.
Did you actually think the entire newscast rest on his shoulders?
[/QUOTE]
> [@](#):
>
> Several former colleagues said they were baffled by the move. “I think he’s gone off the deep end,” said Josh Howard, who was forced to resign as executive producer of “60 Minutes II” after CBS retracted the story. "He seems to be saying he was just the narrator.
>
> “He did every interview. He worked the sources over the phone. He was there in the room with the so-called document experts. He argued over every line in the script. It’s laughable.”
[From Howard Kurtz in the Washington Post.](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/19/AR2007091901445.html)
---
### Author:  [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)
#### Post date: [September 20, 2007, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/9 "2007-09-20T19:20:45Z")
The right wing obsession with Dan Rather is hilarious. This in a nation where the corporate media has suppressed any coverage of the Downing Street memos. Where the Republican Party has their very own “news” network. Where Clinton’s infidelities were lit up with a spotlight while Bush’s are cloaked in darkness. Rather has more journalistic integrity than everyone at Faux News put together. Although the documents in question could not be authenticated, the contents of them were indisputably true. So with all the misdirection skills of a sideshow barker, the Republican Party has managed to turn attention away from Bush’s dereliction of duty and turned it on to a dedicated journalist.
---
### Author:  [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)
#### Post date: [September 20, 2007, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/10 "2007-09-20T20:10:19Z")
[QUOTE=BobLibDem]
The right wing obsession with Dan Rather is hilarious. This in a nation where the corporate media has suppressed any coverage of the Downing Street memos. Where the Republican Party has their very own “news” network. Where Clinton’s infidelities were lit up with a spotlight while Bush’s are cloaked in darkness. Rather has more journalistic integrity than everyone at Faux News put together. Although the documents in question could not be authenticated, the contents of them were indisputably true. So with all the misdirection skills of a sideshow barker, the Republican Party has managed to turn attention away from Bush’s dereliction of duty and turned it on to a dedicated journalist.
[/QUOTE]
Simple question. True or false: the documents were forgeries.
I love this “the documents could not be authenticated” bullshit. Are you suggesting they were NOT forgeries?
---
### Author:  [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)
#### Post date: [September 20, 2007, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/11 "2007-09-20T20:21:49Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker]
Simple question. True or false: the documents were forgeries.
I love this “the documents could not be authenticated” bullshit. Are you suggesting they were NOT forgeries?
[/QUOTE]
Or maybe he’s suggesting that it doesn’t matter that they were forgeries if what they said was true? Maybe the cops should plant evidence, as well, as long as they are pretty sure a guy’s guilty.
Incidentally, it’s kind of funny how someone can believe something is true when the only evidence for it is a forged document.
---
### Author:  [@nonymouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nonymouse)
#### Post date: [September 20, 2007, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/12 "2007-09-20T20:22:07Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker]
Simple question. True or false: the documents were forgeries.
I love this “the documents could not be authenticated” bullshit. Are you suggesting they were NOT forgeries?
[/QUOTE]
More important question: Was what they said true?
---
### Author:  [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)
#### Post date: [September 20, 2007, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/13 "2007-09-20T22:47:44Z")
[QUOTE=nonymouse]
More important question: Was what they said true?
[/QUOTE]
See that little dot, waaaaay off in the distance? It’s the boat you missed.
The documents were offered to PROVE that their contents were true. That was the reason for showing them. You cannot pretend that the more important question is _Was what they said true?_ when the documents existed for the purpose of convincing us that what they said was true.
If the documents were fake, but the underlying facts were true, then the appropriate thing to do is discard the documents and offer truthful evidence that the story they told was real.
As **Sarafeena** points out, this line of thinking suggests that we can plant evidence on guilty suspects to ensure a conviction; it leaves out the realization that the evidence is supposed to lead us to the conclusion that they are guilty in the first place.
---
### Author:  [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)
#### Post date: [September 20, 2007, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/14 "2007-09-20T23:27:50Z")
Mighty slippery, counselor. The documents exist for a purpose? Well, if they were manufactured specifically to that end, you might have a point. But, IIRC, the lady who produced them testified that they were recreations of previous documents created for purposes of bureaucracy, not political slander. They may have been misused or no, but they were not “created” to a purpose, unless you can prove otherwise.
---
### Author:  [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)
#### Post date: [September 20, 2007, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/15 "2007-09-20T23:43:30Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker]
Simple question. True or false: the documents were forgeries.
I love this “the documents could not be authenticated” bullshit. Are you suggesting they were NOT forgeries?
[/QUOTE]
Simple answer: I don’t know. And I don’t think anyone is absolutely certain.
---
### Author:  [@Plan\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plan_B)
#### Post date: [September 21, 2007, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/16 "2007-09-21T00:50:26Z")
[QUOTE=BobLibDem]
Simple answer: I don’t know. And I don’t think anyone is absolutely certain.
[/QUOTE]
I’m absolutely certain they were forgeries.
---
### Author:  [@Plan\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plan_B)
#### Post date: [September 21, 2007, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/17 "2007-09-21T00:55:36Z")
[QUOTE=BobLibDem]
The right wing obsession with Dan Rather is hilarious.
[/QUOTE]
Cite, please? I’ve been reading right wing blogs for years and the last time I remember reading his name was around the time he got fired. A quick search of Instapundit shows about one reference every two months, usually to make fun of someone else.
---
### Author:  [@Frostillicus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frostillicus)
#### Post date: [September 21, 2007, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/18 "2007-09-21T02:33:54Z")
[QUOTE=Plan B]
[http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hUVO6cyEPAt-CaWVsvqXELJ0\_DCw](http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hUVO6cyEPAt-CaWVsvqXELJ0_DCw)
Apparently Dan Rather is pissed off about the way CBS treated him after he got caught faking the evidence in a story about GWB. I hope the trial drags on for a long, long time and we find out all the dirty secrets about what went on while Bush was in the Air National Guard..
[/QUOTE]
Fixed your post.
---
### Author:  [@Frostillicus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frostillicus)
#### Post date: [September 21, 2007, 2:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/19 "2007-09-21T02:35:05Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker]
Simple question. True or false: the documents were forgeries.
[/QUOTE]
False. That was easy.
---
### Author:  [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)
#### Post date: [September 21, 2007, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832/20 "2007-09-21T02:45:52Z")
Okay, then…how about “unattributed recreations purporting to be something they weren’t”? 😃
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dan-rather-files-70m-suit-against-cbs/419832.md?page=2)