Jim called me last night all excited about the revelations regarding the fake (I think I’ll consider it so, now) document used in 60 Minutes. “You’ve got to come on in the morning and talk about this.” How can you decline something like that? So, this morning I stumbled and mumbled my way through the broadcast. Jim was still all worked up, and we both had difficulty staying on target. Consensus is that Dan Rather and his producers who put this document out as legitimate need to be very worried about their future.
He asked how I thought it would affect CBS’s credibility. It won’t. As with everything else in this current cultural divide, you either believe everything they say or nothing. Count me with the latter.
He did take issue with my contention that a broadcast license was a public trust. I understand his perspective as a radio man trying to make a profit. Business means you stay in business. Agree. But any time the government bequeaths a license, they are saying that you meet the necessary professional requirements such that the public can trust your expertise. Lawyers, doctors, engineers, and many other fields require a license to work in the public interest. I see no reason why broadcast media shouldn’t be compared in this way.
Like I said, Jim disagrees, but wouldn’t life be dull if we all agreed on everything?
***UPDATE***
And Wretchard has impeccable analysis:
The traditional news model is collapsing.
And now a Kerry document has appeared.
I couldn’t agree more.
As fate would have it, I just posted on the very ideas you refer to.
Of course, you said it more clearly and in fewer words.
Comment by AH — September 10, 2004 @ 9:25 am
Visitors, check Alex’s post on this topic.
Comment by Bunker — September 10, 2004 @ 10:22 am
So, you are on the record as saying these documents are forgeries?
I am still researching this topic, but there is lots of evidence supporting both sides. Too close to call in my opinion.
I would be careful…The truth is out there. The other side is looking for it. And it is mad.
From Air Force Data Systems Design Center:
690400 (Ed. – Date 4/69?)
A Service Test was completed for the International Business Machines (IBM) “Selectric” typewriter and Magnetic Tape “Selectric” Composer.
I wonder where and when these typewriters were first produced? Answer: Austin, TX in the 60s.
Hmmmm.
Comment by curveball — September 10, 2004 @ 12:01 pm
You’re now reaching. These may be reconstructions of something that actually exists, but the documents being shown are certainly false.
Incidentally, the superscript could be done on a regular typewriter, but I’ve never seen one that changed font size without changing typeball or wheel. And in writing a MEMO or any professional paper at the time (even now), nobody would take the time to put in a superscript when a normal “187th” was used. If a word processor does it for me, okay. But if I’m not a speed typist, I certainly care more about spelling things correctly than putting in flourishes.
Comment by Bunker — September 10, 2004 @ 12:17 pm
It may be a unlikely, but not impossible to change the font catridge.
My family had an IBM typewriter in the late 70s that my mother used to write novels on before we got our Apple IIe in the 80s. She changed the font ball all the time to render that effect when writing. She wasn’t a secretary, but she did use it that way. That is one of the reasons that she had the same font in multiple sizes. And she still is one of the fastest typers I have ever seen.
Also, where did you get the paper size argument? All I have seen is PDFs, are you sure of the dimensions of the originals? I do lots of PDF generating and I would never think of making a PDF in a non-standard format. Although custom paper sizes are allowed in Acrobat, it is common to use Imperial paper sizes, otherwise you end up confusing the output printer. Are you saying you used the size US Government which is 8″ x 11″?
Comment by curveball — September 10, 2004 @ 1:03 pm
This is from a commenter at Kevin Drum’s Washington Monthly site:
Oh, boy. You still on the record as saying those are forged?
Comment by curveball — September 10, 2004 @ 2:23 pm
yes
Comment by Bunker — September 10, 2004 @ 4:10 pm
As unwieldy as military contracts are, I can’t imagine the military ordering replacement typewriter heads in innumerable shapes, sizes and varieties.
Nor can I imagine military clerks getting up and switching heads, day in and day out.
Call me crazy.
Comment by AH — September 10, 2004 @ 4:45 pm
There are two reasons why I think these documents are not real.
The first is the machinery. Sure, I have seen the reports that there were machines that existed in this time that could produce the same type font and special characteristcs that are in question. But would these be available to standard Air Guard offices? The answer to that is probably 99% no. Why? THe Guard and Reserves live off of even lower budgets than regular military units. All of their budgets are expended keeping their units at a certain level of readiness. There is very little room for in a budget for administrative equipment improvements. The military is years behind in this department. As I have seen working on many different Guard bases, they still have units now that are still using 286 computers. I don’t think that thirty years ago things were so different that a Nat’l Guard unit would be able to afford the most up-to-date typewriters.
The second is the supposed source of the memo. I have heard that these memos were from the personal files of LtCol Killian, his old squadron commander. Now I don’t know anything more about this man than anyone else, but I do know a bit about military record keeping. I know of no one who keeps records of every report they write, let alone for thirty years. LtCol Killian’s wife and son have both said that he did not keep a records library, so I would be extremely surprised if this guy decided to keep one particular document from his 20+ Guard career.
These types of memos serve as one of two things, either a warning to an individual or supporting documentation to support a bad performance evaluation. Either way, they are typically thrown out after that, or perhaps kept until that person leaves the unit. Since missing required drill time is a required mention in Guard and Reserve performance evaluations, to have this memo come out without it mentioned in any of the other documents released by the Pentagon would be a real surprise. Also, if these files were retained by the unit, they would have been destroyed after a few years. Otherwise they would have been forwarded to the Pentagon, but I do not think that is where these documents were discovered.
Additionally, if these files came from personal files that his wife and son did not know about, where did any investigative reporter find them?
Comment by Slice — September 11, 2004 @ 9:31 am
AH: “Crazy”…There. Now, correct me if I am wrong, but almost everything the military purchases is specialized right?
Now, if I were IBM and you were the Military, I would be willing to customize these machines to do whatever you wanted in order to get that contract. The infrastructure is already in the machine to be able to adapt it to a specilized industries that generate many documents, like say, Law firms…Why would I not want to capitalize on your needs?
Say you are a weather station that wanted to type degree symbol, ° — would you want that?
Say you were a business and you had to type the trademark symbol ™ on you machine all the time…Would you ask for that feature?
And what about fractions? Maybe your a builder and would like to type a fraction like ½ instead of doing it like this: 1/2. Would you ask for it?
The point is that Word Processors have been designed since day one to emulate the typewriter. Because the default behavior of the program is geared for people who started using word processors (like me) said to themselves: ‘Damn, I wish I could type superscript “th”s on this computer, like I did back on my old typewriter. Oh, look, it just automatically did it for me. How clever.’
The real bottom line is: Yes, these documents could have been produced by a typewriter in the early 70s. Your LGF and Powerline buddies did not do enough homework to prove otherwise. The only way to really prove it one way or the other is for CBS to have the orginal memos verified…Which they claim to have done.
But until then, I would hold off on revoking their broadcast license, or insinuating that the MSM, as you call it, is in any danger of collapse. No offense, but I trust Dan Rather more the Charles Johnson or Matt Drudge.
Comment by curveball — September 11, 2004 @ 12:20 pm