|
|
"Dan Rather Happy to Be in 'Beirut'"
Harvard
Law Record - October 16, 1992 - Pages 1, 10
By Glennis Gill
reprinted by permission
Well before the scheduled
time on Tuesday, October 13, students jammed into Austin West to hear Dan
Rather. Rather, the Anchor and Managing Editor of the CBS Evening
News and 48 Hours, was the guest of the Harvard Law School
Forum. He was introduced by Chad Johnson '93., president of the
Forum. The first Forum speaker this year, Rather, who has been with CBS
News since 1962, has covered just about every event that has occurred during
the last three decades.
Rather began his address by commenting that "it's
certainly good to be here in Beirut." He had read Vanity Fair just
before coming to "Lebanon on the Charles" and said "I don't
think much of it." He continued that "I believe in your
school, I believe in your teachers and I believe in the students here."
Prefacing his comments with the caveat that "I'm not
an expert on anything ... but I am a questioner by profession and by
nature." Rather then went on to discuss "Public
Accountability."
He pointed out that 'we Americans ... tend to take for
granted one of the most remarkable aspects of our government ... the
expectation of and series of procedures for accountability of those who govern
us." According to Rather, the safeguards to ensure this are the
vote, the court and the free press.
Giving HLS students more credit than may be warranted,
Rather said that "presumably a good number of you -- I'd like to think
all of you -- aren't here because you want to make close to $100,000 after
leaving, but are here because you believe our system of laws can be used to
benefit the people of this country." He added "don't lose
sight of that belief" and asserted that an ethical necessity of
accountability applies to everyone.
Applying this public accountability to current news items,
Rather said that "tonight is the vice-presidental edition of our national
quiz show, which some people are trying to tell you is a debate."
Asserting that we have not had a good debate of national leaders in a very
long time, Rather explained that "the real reason is presidents do not
want one, and neither have some of the candidates." The candidates
have thus been able to control and manipulate all aspects of these "joint
appearances."
Given these conditions, Rather said that it's no wonder
that after the first joint appearance, all three candidates came out to say
they had won something. But the public lost, mainly because the format
was clumsy and follow-up wasn't allowed, preventing the challenging of
pre-packaged answers. Another result of this manipulated joint
appearance was that many key issues were never even raised, including the
Iran-Contra case, loans to Iraq, abortion, Supreme Court appointments and the
environment.
Rather concluded that "we should be
disgusted." He continued that "we can do better" and
should stage a real debate which "would mean exposure to real questions,
and follow-up ... real debates account directly to the people, then we could
have accountability, and as an added advantage, members of the press wouldn't
have to do a damn thing."
A model for this would be the seven Lincoln-Douglas
debates, which Rather sees as "a treasure of our political heritage ...
there were two fine speakers, challenging each other ... without any spin
doctors or programmers ... it is absolutely thrilling stuff." The
format "shows the world has changed a lot." In the
Lincoln-Douglas debates, the first speaker spoke for an hour, then the other
spoke for 90 minutes, and then the first speaker got 30 more minutes.
This is quite different from today, where a very long piece run on the network
news is five minutes. This brevity is mainly due to marketing people,
who tell us this is as much as the modern attention span can take.
Times, however, have changed; in 1858, lectures were considered
"entertainment." Still, Rather asserted that "we can
bring back the essence of their debates to 1992."
Citing this event as a failure of public accountability,
Rather espoused his great belief in events like real debates and national
conventions. He said that "we journalists ... chose a profession
that's dedicated to providing an opportunity for our fellow citizens to know,
to think for themselves, and we have some accounting to do every time we fail
to hold our leaders accountable."
Although real debates would help, Rather contended that for
certain issues -- like who armed Saddam Hussein and was it legal -- we can't
expect full answers even from real debates. These questions need a free
press and a free judiciary, because they are instruments of accountability.
Rather concluded his hour-long talk by stating that
"people will look to you for leadership ... that's a burden that comes
with being here ... you have a choice, you can hide or try to lead -- and if
you try to lead, you can help -- you can call us all to account ..."
After loud applause, hands quickly went up, and Rather
addressed many questions.
Asked about the fact that he doesn't get interviews with
President Bush because he is unwilling to let Bush impose conditions, while
newscasters like Katie Couric are invited into the White House to talk to
President Bush, Rather commented about his own code and that of CBS
News. He stated that "everybody in journalism is torn by ... the
sometimes conflicting desires to do well and and the same time do
right." He talked about walking that line while knowing that by his
journalistic standards, the only client is the people in the living room, but
there is also the knowledge that there is leadership at the news organization
deciding about the next paycheck. He continued that "I am concerned
about some of the trends in American journalism ... towards not taking any
risks ... that leads to poor national leadership."
Rather said that "it is CBS News' policy and my own
code that I won't submit questions ahead ... we lose interviews that way, but
I believe it works best ... some others work differently..."
He added that "we have at times tried to strike a deal, but we later
regretted it."
One student asked for Rather's reactions to the appearances
by candidates on shows like "Larry King Live." Although he
"has concerns about it as a substitute for other forms of
interrogation," he does believe that "the more the
better." However, we won't see Dan Rather engaging in this because
"it isn't for me. I do a different kind of work -- I'm a hard news
person."
Asked why the news reports on the candidates' personal
lives, Rather said "I don't like it" and "I don't believe I've
ever engaged in that kind of reporting." He added "I don't
care who's sleeping with whom -- I don't even care whether they've
slept." But pressed on why the news keeps covering it, Rather
responded that it's "because you tune in to watch it ... when people stop
doing that, the press will stop reporting it."