FAIR Action Alert:: The Mysterious Case of the CBS Memos

[G_j]

(mods, it is my understanding that FAIR action alerts can be posted in full. if there is a problem I will edit)

Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting
Media analysis, critiques and activism

http://www.fair.org/activism/cbs-memos-knox.html

ACTION ALERT:
The Mysterious Case of the CBS Memos

September 16, 2004

The secretary of George W. Bush's National Guard commander, coming forward
to describe memos supposedly written by her boss as "correct" but "not
real" (Dallas Morning News, 9/14/04), has deepened the mystery about the
disputed documents.

Marian Carr Knox is a compelling witness who provides substantive reasons
to doubt the authenticity of the memos bearing the signature of Lt. Col.
Jerry Killian-- forcing CBS News to run an interview with her (CBS Evening
News and 60 Minutes II, 9/15/04) that cast doubt on aspects of its
September 9 reporting on the Bush Guard story. At the same time, she
debunked several of the specific reasons other news outlets had given for
questioning the memos that were featured in that report.

For example, an ABC News report (Nightline, 9/9/04) questioning the
documents featured members of Killian's family charging that their
relative would not have written anything like these memos. Killian's widow
asserted that he "did not take copious notes" and "carried everything in
his mind," while his son said, "It was not the nature of my father to keep
private files like this, nor would it have been in his own interest to do
so."

Knox, however, told the New York Times (9/15/04) that "Mr. Killian had her
type memorandums recording the problems" with Bush's Guard service, and
that "he kept them in a private file under lock and key."

Like many skeptics of the documents, ABC also drew attention to
superscript characters that appear in the memos (Good Morning America,
9/10/04), stating that "forgery experts...say that this kind of
superscript was not available on a typewriter in 1972 or 1973." Yet Knox
(Dallas Morning News, 9/14/04) said that her old typewriter, while not
used to create the memos CBS featured, did "ha a key with the 'th'
superscript character that has been the focus of much debate in the CBS
memos."

Several other assertions made by document experts in an ABC (9/10/04)
online piece appear to be similarly ill-grounded. "The font used in the
memos is Times Roman, which was in use for printing but not in
typewriters," ABC reported. Actually, Times New Roman, as the font is
usually called, was adapted for the IBM Selectric (a brand of typewriter
Knox said she used-- Dallas Morning News, 9/14/04) by the font's original
designer, Stanley Morison, in the late 1960s (AIGA Design Forum, 3/10/04;
Media Matters, 9/10/04).

(Much has been made of the fact that the typeface apparently used in the
memos resembles the default typeface of the common Microsoft Word
word-processing program, which is Times New Roman. But a side-by-side
comparison of the characters in the document with MS Word characters shows
that they are obviously not identical; the numeral characters in
particular are quite distinct. See JuliusBlog, 9/10/04).

With a credible first-hand witness to Killian's correspondence coming
forward to cast doubt on the memos' authenticity, however, one has to
conclude that the skeptics of the documents may well be right, if for many
of the wrong reasons. (Some skeptics did raise the same questions
involving terminology used in the memos that were cited by Knox in her
comments.)

But while Knox greatly undermines the documentation of the CBS reporting,
it is important for critics to recognize that she corroborates the
substance of that reporting. "The information in them is correct," she
told the New York Times (9/15/04). "It looks like someone may have read
the originals and put that together."

That "someone," a report in Newsweek (9/30/04) suggested, may have been
Bill Burkett, a former Texas National Guard lieutenant colonel who has
charged that Bush's Guard records were culled in 1997 to eliminate
"anything there that will embarrass the governor" (Dallas Morning
News, 2/11/04). While these charges were dismissed by the White House at
the time, if Burkett is the source of memos that accurately reflect the
thinking of Bush's commander, that would support the notion that Burkett
had access to National Guard files that no longer seem to exist. An
anonymous person at CBS told the Times-- 9/15/04-- that Burkett was a
source for the network's reporting, but did not say that he provided the
memos.

If Burkett is the source of the documents, it's not certain that the memos
are forged recreations and not originals. Dennis Adams, a Guard associate
of Burkett's, told the New York Times (9/16/04) that Burkett told him of
the document destruction, and that "some of the things in the trash were
pulled out." Given that the documents have not yet been conclusively shown
to have been created on a computer, it remains a possibility that they are
originals salvaged by Burkett-- perhaps typed by someone other than Knox.

Nevertheless, the testimony by Knox does raise questions about whether CBS
News exercised due diligence in evaluating the memos before using them to
buttress its September 9 reporting. Some document experts have said
subsequently that CBS ignored concerns they raised about the memos (ABC
News, 9/14/04; Washington Post, 9/15/04), which could indicate that the
network cut corners in its fact-checking process.

On the other hand, CBS could have been legitimately reassured that some of
the issues that the experts raised-- such as the use of superscript-- were
not incompatible with documents of the era. An internal review of CBS's
newsgathering on this story could help to clear up questions about the
network's journalistic performance.

And even if CBS stands by its promise of confidentiality to the source who
provided the memos, the network could do more to help other news outlets
investigate the origins of the curious documents-- notably by releasing
higher-quality scans that would facilitate analysis of their production.
(USA Today, which reported having copies of the same documents, could also
make high-quality electronic versions available.)

But media should not lose sight of the fact that if questions about how
CBS reported this story are important, it is mainly because the story
itself is important. The information in the memos that Knox vouched for
includes assertions that Bush was suspended from flying for refusal to
obey a direct order to take a required flight physical, and for failure to
perform to standards of the Texas Air National Guard. Knox also bolsters
the allegation that Bush's commanding officer was under pressure to "sugar
coat" Bush's records-- and that he was willing to "backdate" records to
benefit Bush.

The fact that someone was able to bring these charges to CBS, even though
they no longer seem to exist in Bush's official records, lends at least
some credence to the very serious charge that Bush's records have been
sanitized. Whether or not CBS's journalistic standards will hold up under
the scrutiny they will no doubt receive in coming days, it's clear that
evidence of an official cover-up of Bush's service record is a more
pressing story than whatever reportorial failings Dan Rather might be
guilty of.

ACTION:
Please encourage CBS News to conduct a review of the standards used in its
September 9 reporting on Bush's National Guard service-- while continuing
to pursue the important questions raised in that reporting about a
possible cover-up of Bush's record.

CONTACT:
CBS Evening News
mailto:[email protected]

[Myrina]

1. Ka-POW

"Whether or not CBS's journalistic standards will hold up under
the scrutiny they will no doubt receive in coming days, it's clear that evidence of an official cover-up of Bush's service record is a more pressing story ..."

And that, my friends is the issue that KKKarl does NOT want addressed.

[speedoo]

3. Yup.

That's the big story, because it's current. But Rove also does not want the fundamentals of the AWOL story addressed.... preferential treatment, why no medical exam, etc.

Dan the Man must keep the story moving.

[michigandem2]

4. this is what I have been saying...

if they focus too much on these "forgeries" the content OF them will start to gain some momentum...Dan did a fabulous job putting the content of the memos back on the table...

its not going to end up good for bush if the substance starts getting scruitinized..of course we are relying SOLELY on CBS to actual do the reporting on this...because the rest will back off of it like a "hot potato"

[shrub chipper]

6. This needs to be stressed over and over

and over!!!!

[LisaLynne]

2. FAIR's involved?

Karl had better run.

[shraby]

5. Where are the memos that Ms. Knox

typed up for Killian? Are they missing?

[G_j]

11. it is hard to imagine keeping memos for that long

memos tend to pile up. :shrug:

[ItsMyParty]

7. Lightbulb just went on

..while reading this. This Burkett is in the Guard and he sees info being thrown away, etc. Could it have been that HE SIMPLY READ the memos being thrown and then LATER sat down within days of seeing these tossed memos, at the office typewriter and tried to re-create them from his memory???? That could be one reason they would fit this criteria: 1) done on that same office type typewriter with the 'th' mentioned by Knox; 2) be very much like what Knox knew Killian wrote and thought about Bush but not be the originals. Did anyone think of that!!! And Burkett has had his recreations in his possession for all these years......then just put Killians name and initials on various ones from old documents he had and Xerox'd the whole thing to look like one complete document.

[LiberalFighter]

8. What was the excuse used about the wrong language used..

Army slang instead of Air Force??

[Qutzupalotl]

10. Killian's wording and not Knox' typing.

Killian could have picked up jargon from elsewhere in the military. Knox would not have. I think Killian typed them himself, as added CYA, and didn't tell Knox about their existence. He certainly signed them.

[G_j]

9. kick

[G_j]

12. kick