Intermarkets' Privacy Policy
Support


Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!


Contact
Ace:
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
CBD:
cbd at cutjibnewsletter.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com


Recent Entries
Absent Friends
Captain Whitebread 2026
Jon Ekdahl 2026
Jay Guevara 2025
Jim Sunk New Dawn 2025
Jewells45 2025
Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups





















« Rather Lied; MSM Credibility Died | Main | Liberal Girls -- and Boys -- Play With Dollies »
January 10, 2005

Black Rock Margaritaville

Some people claim that there's a woman to blame. CBS agrees-- it was all Mary Mapes' fault.

The Anchoress has an internal Les Moonves memo to CBS News, which scapegoats the entire affair on Mary Mapes. Sure, "mistakes were made" by others, and the "system broke down" -- that sort of crap, in which general errors are blamed upon no one at all -- but jot by tittle the memo places all active wrongdoing squarely on Mapes.

Is this fair? Well, certainly Mapes is guilty, and deserves to be canned. And to never work for a prominent, allegedly-unbiased news organization again. But I find it rather incredible that this one producer did so much wrong and yet no one in a thousand-man news division stopped her-- or even asked tough questions.

And so she dances at rope's end:

As far as the question of reporting is concerned, the bottom line is that much of the September 8th broadcast was wrong, incomplete or unfair. The Panel found that the producer of the segment, Mary Mapes, ignored information that cast doubt on the story she had set out to report - that President Bush had received special treatment more than 30 years ago, getting into the Guard ahead of many other applicants, and had done so to avoid service in Vietnam. As the Panel found, statements made by sources were ignored, as were notes in Mapes' own files. Most troubling, however, are the Panel's findings regarding Mapes' ongoing contention, later proven to be false, that the documents used in the story were authenticated and had been obtained from a "rock-solid" source who had established, in retrospect, a questionable chain of custody for them. The Panel also found that Mapes presented half-truths as facts to those with whom she worked. And they trusted her, relied on her impressive reputation and proven track record, and did not hold her to the high standards of accountability that have always been the backbone of CBS News reporting.

There are, of course, supposed to be institutional safeguards against over-eager reporters. In this case, the vetting process failed. On many occasions, Mapes and her team referred to the source of the now-discredited documents as unimpeachable and as someone "without an ax to grind" against President Bush. However, there was little or no attempt along the way to ascertain from the producers who that confidential source was. In the end, it turned out that this individual had a history on this story that should have been disclosed.

Just as bad was the process of authenticating the documents, as described in the Panel's report. Assured by Mapes that she had ample expert authentication of the documents, 60 Minutes Wednesday and CBS News management did little to seek affidavits from the handwriting experts. In fact, the people in charge of vetting the piece were never told that while four people were given some documents to authenticate the handwriting and the typography, two experts were discounted when they raised objections, and all four experts warned that documents could not be authenticated from Xeroxed copies.

The memo then goes on to explain that the other sacked employees didn't vet the story properly and didn't question Mapes hard enough, but again, Moonves lays all active wrongdoing at Mapes' feet.

And then, of course, he goes on to engage in rank apologism on behalf of Rather and Heyward.

You know, for an organization that surely prides itself on progressive thought in hiring and promotion, it sure seems they canned a lot of women and defended a lot of the Old Boys.

H/t to Roger Simon, who castigates the report for refusing to state the obvious-- these were a bunch of politically-motivated, Kerry-supporting liberal hacks out to do a hatchet job on Bush.

I guess it's a question of expectations. Did I *really* think that Daniel Okrent would expose the New York Times for the agenda-driven DNC-adjunct it is, just because he was appointed "Public Editor"? Of course not.

The media will never admit its liberal. Never. And no report prepared at the request of the media will ever admit that bias, either. Hell, normal, non-media liberals on the street won't admit they're liberal ("I have a lot of different views," they'll tell you, as your eyes drift over to their "Arms are made for hugging" bumper sticker), and it's just not realistic to expect the media to ever come clean about something they've been lying about for, oh, going on 40 years now.

Update: Defeat John John has a similar take, thinking it unrealistic that the media would ever actually admit to partisan conspiracy.

He's also got a funny cartoon on Colonel Killian's "Magic Typewriter."


posted by Ace at 11:23 PM
Comments



Okrent quote... "Is the New York Times a liberal paper? Of course it is."

Then of course he went right back into la-la land and started mumbling something about privelege for pederasty.

Posted by: thoughtomator on January 11, 2005 12:56 AM

For the life of me, after reading the full report I can't see how Thornburgh could say there was no political bias at all even if there was some sort of a mechanical breakdown in attempting to get the news out fast....if CBS was as "quick" and therefore suffered a similar "breakdown" in attempting to discover why Kerry refused to have his military records out in public I guess I would be able to stomach that finding a bit better....

Posted by: bsp on January 11, 2005 08:58 AM

Cry me a river.
For every example of your fictional "liberal" media, there are plenty of examples citing "conservative" media. But you won't see them because we aren't boo-hooing everyday about it, like you Ace.
"Wahhhhhhhhhh........CBS.........liberal media.......wahhhhhhhh NYT.......wahhhhhhhh."

Posted by: Ryan on January 11, 2005 09:16 AM

From a post on Rathergate.com:

On the September 14 CBS Evening News, the transcript [PDF] contains the following:


John Roberts: The President has yet to weigh in on new documents about his National Guard record made public last week by 60 Minutes. But in a radio interview, First Lady Laura Bush became the first White House insider to publicly doubt their authenticity.

Laura Bush: You know they probably are altered and they probably are forgeries.

John Roberts: However, Laura Bush offered no evidence to back up her claim and CBS News continues to stand by its reporting.

Although the reporting is factual, it did tend to make the First Lady’s claims seem unsupported, when it was in fact CBS News’ claims that didn’t have sufficient support. I think a short, simple apology is in order.

Posted by: bsp on January 11, 2005 09:18 AM

Mason has been with CBS how long? Jeeze. It just amazes me that CBS's "new" image is going to be determined in part by someone that is so old her crabs have to carry canteens.

Posted by: bsp on January 11, 2005 10:48 AM

One thing that continually irritates me about Memogate is the seeming assumption by CBS News that it was the responsibility of the White House to prove that the documents WERE NOT authentic. In other words, "Here's a bunch of papers that we're obtained from somebody, now you wanna' refute them, and if so, tell us why they AREN'T authentic?"

I call this rolling a hand grenade on the table and expecting someone else to disarm it. I also call it utterly disingenuous and crass. Why hasn't anybody else called them on this?

Posted by: Dan-O on January 11, 2005 12:24 PM

Because that takes guts, and we've become a nation of whinning spineless victims.
Except for Rummy. And Cartman.

Posted by: Iblis on January 11, 2005 12:32 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?








Now Available!
The Deplorable Gourmet
A Horde-sourced Cookbook
[All profits go to charity]
Top Headlines
Dude trolls a city council meeting about permitting yet another mosque by promising the mosque will destroy America
"All women who are overweight or obese will have to wear burka. 10,000 steps per day, low carb."
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: Will Cuba fall without a fight? More Iran confusion, gun rights for felons isn't a crazy idea, wetbacks are voting! And are data centers of the devil? Nope!
Months ago, I reported that the final Zodiac cypher had been cracked and the name of the killer revealed. And the name of the killer turned out to be someone suspected in the unsolved Black Dahlia murder. The general tone of my mention of this was "serious you guys, this is real."
Well, it's not real. It's total bullshit.
Sorry about that. I did two things: 1, I bought into something, a conspiracy theory really, because it was new and exciting. And 2, I allowed a self-declared "expert" to snow me over with his "expert" claims about solving ciphers, an alleged expertise I could not challenge because I know practically nothing about codebreaking. I remember being similarly swindled by self-declared "experts" babbling about "chromatic aberrations." (Although I didn't really buy into that, but I found it "interesting" and I wasn't strongly skeptical about it. Hey they said they're "experts," they must know that they're talking about, right?)
I screwed up. It won't be the last time, I'm sure.
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: In Wisconsin, the Dems steal an election from themselves, abortion is cheered in Massachusetts, Spain gets what it voted for, the economy is humming, and more!
Via Archimedes:
Selections from H.P. Lovecraft's Brief Tenure as a Whitman's Sampler Copywriter

Chocolate Cherry Cordial
You must not think me mad when I tell you what I found below the thin shell of chocolate used to disguise this bonbon's true face. Yes! Hidden beneath its rich exterior is a hideously moist cherry cordial! What deranged architect could have engineered this non-Euclidean aberration? I dare not speculate.

Caramel Chew
There is a dimension ruled by a blind caramel God-King who sits on a vast, cyclopean milk-chocolate throne while his mindless, gooey followers dance to the piping of crazed flutes. It is said that there are gateways in our world that lead to this caramel hell-planet. The delectable Caramel Chew may be one such portal.

More at this ineffable link
Forgotten 80s Mystery Click
I haven't forgotten this one. I play it a couple of times a month. But I bet a lot of you forgot it:
Athletic (boogie down)
Hustle (turn back)
Feel pathetic (sugar town)
No muscle (soul hack)
I'm jumping (you move)
No dancer (beside me)
I'm thumping (you prove)
Don't get no answer
On "Professor" Arday:
He was their living lawn jockey, period. They won't say that 'cause they're sensitive and down with his struggle and all. He was there to appease and flatter their sense of being uplifters of the oppressed. In truth, he served as their living lawn jockey -- no more, no less, and unworthy of even a second thought on their part. Tokenism, pure and simple.
-- Krebs v Carnot
Ireland's 'Air Force One' lacks a key safety system for fog -- thanks to country's ban on Israeli products
Ireland's best emigrated 150 years ago. The current Ireland is a sad joke. [CBD]
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: More Iran bluster from Trump? Enough! Deportations hit a record, and that is a good thing for all, Todd Blanche's nomination is out of committee, the DSA is on the march, and more!
The Short Unhappy Life of a Russian Soldier: Why recruits die in 20-30 minutes
Interesting video. Some key parts: drones were responsible for 70-80% of all battlefield deaths in mid-2025, and I bet it's higher now. The Russian army is incredibly corrupt. Men get assigned to the most dangerous frontline units, the "Storm" units, unless they pay a superior $2,000 to be assigned to a different unit. Furthermore, there is often no real training for recruits -- commanders pocket the money that would have gone towards fuel and ammo costs incurred during training. Much "training" consists just of taking a single picture of soldiers doing something soldier-y, like fording a river, and publishing that as proof that the training was done. Even when it is done, training is only two weeks long.
Recent Comments
L - No nic, another fine day: "Fabulous Café, lovely photograph, and so enjo ..."

Mr Aspirin Factory: "He is a worthless waste of skin. Posted by: tcn i ..."

NemoMeImpuneLacessit[/i][/b][/u][/s]: "[i]Assistant U.S. Attorney, Andrew Haden, was foun ..."

mindful webworker - wick it which: "All in due time, my dear. All in due time. These ..."

the True Story of Billy Hayes: "Let the Midnight Special Shine a ever lovin' ligh ..."

Rev. Wishbone: ">>>Maybe we should be growing our own produce wher ..."

RandomDave (if you can spare a bit, please click): "Sadly, too many companies still trust university d ..."

JQ: "Maybe we should be growing our own produce where p ..."

Bertram Cabot, Jr.: " Let the Midnight Special Shine a ever lovin' ..."

Bishop Ralph of Shrewsbury: " I make a Kale and White Bean soup for Brit Lass. ..."

r hennigantx: "The only person in trouble over Arday is an Americ ..."

NemoMeImpuneLacessit[/i][/b][/u][/s]: "If Obama said the sky was blue, I would look up to ..."

Bloggers in Arms
Some Humorous Asides
Archives