Comments on: Rather thinks journalism has lost its guts

By: worth

worth — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 19:49:10 +0000

There’s a difference between journalism and blogging (don’t ask me to spell it out, but I know it when I see it). Journalists step away from their keyboards (even if only to work the phone) and find/make stories, “in the field” if you will, whereas bloggers (most of us) are more like commentators. Some actually investigate (online research), but not most. Commentators haven’t lost their guts - they’re as opinionated as ever. And there are plenty of journalists risking their lives around the world as we speak/write. So I’m not sure why he’s all bent or who his target is. Crotchety ol’ man syndrome would be my guess.

By: thedanratherchannel

thedanratherchannel — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 02:56:04 +0000

Journalism ‘lost its guts’, and Gunga Dan lost his audience. Sounds like a fair trade to me…

By: Stephen Downes

Stephen Downes — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 23:24:11 +0000

I love the way all those previous commenters are attacking the person rather than the substance of what he says.

Especially since he’s right (and yes, it applied to him too - but he’s *still* right).

By: Michael Rosenblum

Michael Rosenblum — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 22:55:03 +0000

Rathergate, Schmathergate.
Here is a guy who had his fingers on the levers of jouranlistic power for a whole generation and did diddly squat with it. He has no right to talk about anything now.

By: The Tony

The Tony — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 21:26:52 +0000

I still think he got the short end of the stick in that whole mess, anyway.

Just saying…if he’s the one people want to call hypocritical…there are far worse out there, getting away with a lot more.

By: Michael Chastain

Michael Chastain — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 19:52:45 +0000

There’s one thing that always strikes me about Rathergate. The documents were released to the White House, which in term released them without comment. It seems to me if the documents had been factually inaccurate they would have immediately cried foul. Even though the documents may have been forgeries I’d wager they were factually correct.

By: The Tony

The Tony — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:14:55 +0000

Just because Dan Rather’s a lazy douchebag doesn’t mean everyone else in the media isn’t just as guilty of consistent douchebaggery.

His guilt in that one scandal doesn’t get everyone else off the hook.

By: Allen

Allen — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 16:11:57 +0000

Ouch.

By: Rob

Rob — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:16:12 +0000

Maybe the media has enough guts but is too busy double-checking and triple-checking facts and sources and documents (*cough*) out to make sure when a story airs the reporter doesn’t get burned by false or defamatory information or, in ol’ Afghan Dan’s case, alleged forgeries?

His arguments are so thin you couldn’t slide a cigarette paper between them.