Dan Rather's Autobiography

Dan Rather
(photo from Wikipedia)

In the days when TV was watched on a TV set, Dan Rather worked for CBS News as a journalist. He did his work the old-fashioned way: Rather built a story on a solid foundation of facts, he checked his facts, he really interviewed people, he went to the site of an incident, he told the story in a way that nearly any viewer could grasp. He understood how to put together a television news segment. The Texas-born Rather's career began in radio, which influenced his succinct delivery and ability to ad-lib. He also grew up the hard way, in a wrong-side-of-the-tracks Houston neighborhood. He was as far away from big-time internships and Ivy League pedigree as one could get.

Throughout his career, as Rather plainly states in his newly released autobiography Rather Outspoken, he remained dedicated to the public's need for the "truth." That concept can be a slippery one to embrace, as "truth" can often rely upon individual interpretation. Indeed, the conundrum of "interpretation" is at the heart of the current crisis in American journalism. Rather fought the good fight for high journalistic standards. He continues to do so today, via Mark Cuban's HDNet. However, even Rather concedes that HDNet is a long way from Black Rock.

I'm on the road a bit these days. While I wait for a flight, I sometimes watch TV at an airport gate. The news, or what passes for it, is inevitably on a screen. Almost everything I see, regardless of network, is dreadful. The experience makes me long for the time when CBS News was a worthy standard bearer of excellence. Those days have vanished, partly due, as Rather bitterly points out in his autobiography, to Viacom (and CBS) owner Sumner Redstone's greed and insensitivity to public service.

At least the 80-year-old, still vigorous Rather is trying to pass the torch via HDNet. His journalistic neighborhood, however, is a tough one. Conservatives have rolled over and played dead for a lurid amalgamation of fact and propaganda, of which Fox News is their soiled standard bearer. Many liberals have, to their shame, embraced the exploitative information plantation known as the Huffington Post or to preaching-to-the-choir talking heads. Major newspapers are in obvious decline, though their "brands" retain journalistic pedigree largely linked to their glorious past. Where will the next Dan Rather come from?

Small Media Happy, Fiction Mafia Miffed Over Pulitzer Prizes

Award-winning cartoon by Politico's Matt Wuerker

This year's Pulitzer Prizes were announced today, with some winners bringing welcome new blood into the media mix. According to the Washington Post's report on the prizes, the Pulitzer jurors found the year's best journalism outside the heavy, big-city hitters. That small, relatively unknown reporters and photographers could create prize-winning pieces is a testimony to their determination, skill, and editorial backing. The Pulitzer committee also awarded a prize to a writer from the Huffington Post (a publication whose editor is, in my opinion, intellectually and morally dishonest) and a cartoonist from another blog, Politico.

Journalism is difficult work, often denigrated by a public that prefers ideology and certitude to reasoned argument and dispassionate fact. What's striking about the Pulitzer winners is the risks implicit in the stories they covered so well. They weren't paid enough for their labors and the hazards of their jobs, but you can't put a price on guts.

Ironically, while new media advanced, the Pulitzer committee stiffed the fiction category. This decision, according to a New York Times report, has upset the fiction mafia and some percentage of people who actually read "serious" contemporary novels. While the supposed focus of the publishers' ire was the snubbed books' quality, the Times piece kept coming back to the impact of the Pulitzer action on book sales. Apparently not bent out of shape by the Pulitzer decision was Nora Roberts, whose novels are massive best sellers. She doesn't give a damn about the Pulitzer, or any other award. For a rather different look at an author's life and perspective on publishing, by all means read a recent Washington Post feature on Ms. Roberts.

Lawsuit Against Huffington Post Founders OKd to Continue

A New York judge ruled today that a lawsuit initiated by two Democratic Party consultants against Huffington Post founders Kenneth Lerer and Arianna Huffington (photo) could continue.

The lawsuit allegations, which have overtones of the bitchiness of The Social Network, are briefly summarized in an AP story picked up by the San Jose Mercury News' SiliconValley.com.

For Ms. Huffington, the controversy over her business ethics and apparent willingness to use others' material without compensating them continues. She has notably been quite low profile since AOL paid more than $300 million for the left-wing content aggregator.

There's an object lesson for liberals and libertarians alike. Both tend to forget that it's not just Wall Street pirates or arrogant right-wingers who ruthlessly, relentlessly pursue gain. Greed and power lust are powerful behavioral drives, even for those who prefer Rachel Maddow to Rush Limbaugh, and Ayn Rand to either.

Lawsuit Targets No-Pay Huffington Post; Taibbi Article Targets Wall Street Wives' TARP Deal

Today was a tough day for those who believe they are entitled to get something for nothing.

First up is Huffington Post. It is currently a defendant, along with new HuffPost owner AOL, in a lawsuit filed in a New York U.S. District Court. The suit claims that the plaintiff and other contributors to Arianna Huffington's website were not "paid appropriately" for their work. The story appears in today's LA Times. The suit points out that "none of the $315 million AOL paid to buy the Huffington Post has gone to the writers and producers of the news and opinion website..."

The plaintiff in this case is Jonathan Tasini. If you don't know him, let's just say it's not a name that gets prominent play in The New York Times. He was the lead plaintiff in a landmark electronic rights case involving freelance contributions to media publications. The defendant in that case was none other than The New York Times.

Next up is the curious case of Mrs. John Mack and a close female friend. Mack's spouse, John, was the head of Morgan Stanley during the days of the 2008-2009 financial crisis. According to Matt Taibbi's piece in the upcoming edition of Rolling Stone, Mrs. M. and her pal decided to start an offshore enterprise called Waterfall TALF. Its purpose was to invest in student loans and commercial mortgages. According to Taibbi's story, for "an upfront investment of $15 million, (Waterfall TALF) quickly received $220 million in cash from the Fed, most of which they used to purchase student loans and commercial mortgages. The loans were set up so that (Mrs. Mack and her friend) would keep 100 percent of the gains on the deals, while the Fed and the Treasury [read: the taxpayer] would eat 90 percent of the losses." Nice work if you can get it, don't you think?

The information bubbled to the surface as a consequence of the Fed losing a lawsuit to Bloomberg and Fox News over the right of citizens to have access to government records. The Fed fiercely fought the lawsuit, insisting its secret banking practices were essential to world harmony. The US Supreme Court ruled otherwise, and the Fed reluctantly opened its records to public scrutiny.

The financial blog Zero Hedge cited the Taibbi article; the link to the post is noted here. The photo shows Christy Mack (a/k/a Mrs. Mack) during an appearance on Charlie Rose in which she discussed alternative medicine, one of her cherished causes. She declined to comment on Taibbi's article.

NY Times Writer Jumps to Blog

The Huffington Post recently poached Peter Goodman, a former New York Times business writer. The writer, whose wife was already a Huffington Post contributor, apparently was well paid for his move. The Washington Post story on Goodman's choice is worth reading.

This talent raid feels like a trend in the making. Blogs, especially those bankrolled by independently wealthy individuals such as Ms. Huffington, have well defined audiences that advertisers love. Traditional mainstream publications are having a very difficult time surviving. The Washington Post, for instance, loses money annually. It's kept afloat because the Washington Post Company owns Kaplan, the cram-course kings. The LA Times is broke, the Chicago Tribune is bankrupt, Newsweek is kaput, and The New York Times is struggling. In contrast, and much to political liberals' chagrin, the Murdoch media empire manages to make money.

Still, building a media brand remains difficult, regardless of ideology. One wonders if hiring star writers will make any impact on the reading public. How many people really follow Peter Goodman? And how many of them will follow him from the Times to a non-print venue?