Stop trying to make Dan Rather a thing again

Dan Rather has never apologized for the 2004 Killian documents fraud.

After perpetrating one of the worst acts of media malpractice in the last 40 years, you’d think the press would treat him as a pariah.

But they aren’t. They treat Rather like a wizened elder statesman of news media. (It’s a wonder why public opinion of the press is in the tank, right next to Congress. A total mystery.)

The latest example of a newsroom giving the former anchor breathing space to pretend he’s not a washed-up poor man’s Walter Cronkite comes this week courtesy of the Atlantic, which published an op-ed co-authored by Rather.

If you can believe it, they titled the opinion piece, “Why a Free Press Matters.”

The subhead adds, “Journalists have been keeping a check on power since the creation of the First Amendment. Now they’re being tested.”

Rather writes:

In the 1980s and ’90s, the advent of cable television broadened what had been a limited number of stations into a diverse lineup of niche networks. Into this business opportunity stepped Fox News and Ailes. The sales pitch here was subtler than talk radio; Fox News portrayed itself as a full-fledged news outlet that was a corrective to the liberal press. There are some fine journalists who have worked and continue to work at Fox News. But the majority of programming is opinion rather than news, and this opinion is often in service of conservative political objectives regardless of the facts.
More recently, the entire journalism business model has been upended by the rise of the internet and, even more recently, social media. Suddenly anyone can be a news publisher, regardless of their expertise, sense of fairness, or motives. In this digital free-for-all, the Times can seem like just another website alongside a propaganda outfit like Breitbart News. And “fake news” from individual or state actors can spread like wildfire through Facebook, Twitter, and other similar outlets. In 1984, George Orwell could only imagine a tyrannical central government having the power to systematically undermine objective truth. Today we see that process happening organically through millions of social-media shares.


Who better to opine on fact versus fiction than the man who tried to influence the 2004 election with fake news?

I’m not going to waste any time recounting the rest of Rather’s lengthy op-ed. I don’t particularly care what he has to say about President Trump, the media, etc. The only thing I care about hearing from Rather is a genuine: “I am sorry.” I’m not going to hold my breath.

Rather maintains to this day that his hoax Bush AWOL story was more or less correct. To keep pointing out that his chief piece of evidence was a forgery is quibbling, he claimed as recently as 2015.

Until Rather at least hints that he’s sorry for what he has done to this industry, I see no reason why we shouldn’t remind readers at every opportunity that he is a disgrace to journalism. It may seem like harping on an old point, but it’s true. He’s a disgrace, and that he continues to defend the 2004 Bush papers is evidence of such.

Related Content