Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: + + + + + + + + + +
Karajou, can you help?
I wonder if this is actually a bit light. CBS didn't do its own investigation until after it was painfully apparent they were wrong and their objections to the contrary were only making them look silly. I also remember a response from Rather when asked about how certain he was about the information given where he said something along the lines of 'I am more certain of the truth of this story than I am of any other story I have done in my life.' He, and CBS, cooked their own goose. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 13:58, 15 January 2008 (EST)
I wonder if this is actually a bit light. CBS didn't do its own investigation until after it was painfully apparent they were wrong and their objections to the contrary were only making them look silly. I also remember a response from Rather when asked about how certain he was about the information given where he said something along the lines of 'I am more certain of the truth of this story than I am of any other story I have done in my life.' He, and CBS, cooked their own goose. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 13:58, 15 January 2008 (EST)
==Rewrite intro==
Rathergate is not particularly a derisive term. Actually "-gate" has simply become shorthand for [[scandal]]. [[Watergate]] (Nixon), [[Troopergate]] (Clinton), etc.
And it doesn't refer to the documents, but rather to the '''attempt by Dan Rather to smear presidential candidate [[George W. Bush]]''' - and the aftermath of that attempt:
*his exposure by bloggers who discovered the documents were crudely forged
*his firing (or nonrenewal of contract) by CBS News
Let's fix this, shall we? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 12:07, 28 August 2009 (EDT)