> The document itself that they used was probably at best a re-creation
> the content of the document was not invalid and verified
> several [verified] that such a document did exist at least at one point and time and said exactly what it said
How did you come to believe these assertions to be true? I'd be inclined to believe them at the level that favoritism is often shown for the offspring of wealthy and politically connected folks. My assumption is that a claim of special privilege is likely true. I don't see any justification for any truth to the document. You claim that "several" verified such a document existed. Who are those people?
When I was very young, Dan Rather took over for Walter Cronkite. Their evening TV program I would watch under strict orders of silence in respect for the seriousness my grandfather gave it. Their credibility came from the prestige of an organization with wondrous information processing and distribution capabilities with a multi-generational reputation for seriousness and veracity.
Dan Rather and the CBS institutional response to the blatant and pointless forgery recklessly published before an election was an "emperor has no clothes" moment. In any possible interpretation their response to the revelation of the forgery destroyed their prestige derived authority. Were they incompetent, partisan, indifferent to facts? Whichever direction they demonstrated deep contempt for their audience and are at least part of the reason some are not likely to trust media organizations by default.
So it boils down to “fake but accurate” for you. Glad to establish your level of interest in evidence or lack thereof. I guess that’s a good posture to maintain one’s trust in media.
HOUSTON, Sept. 14 - The secretary for the squadron commander purported to be the author of now-disputed memorandums questioning President Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard said Tuesday that she never typed the documents and believed that they are fakes.
[...]
Mrs. Knox, who was the secretary for the squadron at Ellington Air Force Base from 1957 to 1979, said she recalled Mr. Bush's case and the criticism of him because his record was so unusual. Mr. Killian had her type memorandums recording the problems, she said, and he kept them in a private file under lock and key. She said she had never voted for Mr. Bush, because she disliked his record in office.
It is pretty easy to maintain trust in media if “fake but [maybe] accurate” is A-ok. Maybe it isn't even "fake but accurate" but "fake but fitting with my preconceptions and interest in self-delusion."
> The document itself that they used was probably at best a re-creation
> the content of the document was not invalid and verified
> several [verified] that such a document did exist at least at one point and time and said exactly what it said
How did you come to believe these assertions to be true? I'd be inclined to believe them at the level that favoritism is often shown for the offspring of wealthy and politically connected folks. My assumption is that a claim of special privilege is likely true. I don't see any justification for any truth to the document. You claim that "several" verified such a document existed. Who are those people?
When I was very young, Dan Rather took over for Walter Cronkite. Their evening TV program I would watch under strict orders of silence in respect for the seriousness my grandfather gave it. Their credibility came from the prestige of an organization with wondrous information processing and distribution capabilities with a multi-generational reputation for seriousness and veracity.
Dan Rather and the CBS institutional response to the blatant and pointless forgery recklessly published before an election was an "emperor has no clothes" moment. In any possible interpretation their response to the revelation of the forgery destroyed their prestige derived authority. Were they incompetent, partisan, indifferent to facts? Whichever direction they demonstrated deep contempt for their audience and are at least part of the reason some are not likely to trust media organizations by default.