|
Still Unanswered: Where Did the CBS Documents
Come From and Who Created Them?
A BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTION
by Kristina Borjesson, Editor, INTO THE BUZZSAW: Leading Journalists
Expose the Myth of a Free Press
The core question surrounding the CBS debacle was not examined at
all by the august Thornburg/Boccardi investigation: WHERE DID THOSE
DOCUMENTS COME FROM AND WHO CREATED THEM? Frankly, I think that the
network would have been far better served by dispensing with the Thornburg/Boccardi
investigation and hiring some highly reptilian private investigators
to dig up the truth about the documents instead. Ascribing blame for
allowing Mary Mapes' shoddy reporting to get through doesn't require
an investigation ending in a long report of more than two hundred pages.
A quick look at the chain of command above her and a chat with the
CBS
lawyers who vetted her piece would have answered all those questions.
Having spent three years at CBS producing hours for CBS Reports with Dan Rather,
having won an Emmy for investigative reporting in the process and having had
to verify documents for my own shows, I can tell you that the bottom-line onus
is on the producer to make sure that all the reporting--including all documentation--is
in order. The rubber hits the road at the reporter/producer level--period. Fact-checking
is done at that level. CBS's lawyers vetting the piece are the next significant
line of defense. Nobody mentioned them last night, but they should have held
Mapes' feet to the fire about the provenance of those documents. The senior producer,
the executive producer and the correspondent usually check the content of the
story not for factual errors, but for good storytelling: are all the questions
that would arise in the audience's mind answered? Does the story flow well? Are
there pictures missing? That kind of stuff. If you're a producer at 60 Minutes
and you can't nail down your facts or documentation, you shouldn't be there.
On Chris Matthews' recent Hardball special on the CBS debacle, Tom Jarrell's
tough comments about Dan Rather were interesting given the fact that as a 20/20
correspondent he probably leaned on his producers as much as Dan did on Mary
Mapes, which means he could just as easily been caught with his pants down (so
to speak) on a big story. Here's how it usually works at the magazine shows:
1) Producer writes a blue sheet pitching a show
2) The show is approved and the producer continues research, lines up characters,
etc.
3) The producer writes up a "poop sheet" for the correspondent outlining
the story and describing the characters and the areas of questioning for each.
The correspondent will also get a list of questions for each character he or
she will be interviewing.
4) The field work is done: events and locations shot, secondary characters interviewed
by the producer, primary characters interviewed by the correspondent.
5) Producer writes the script, fact-checking's done (often by associate producer),
senior producer approves script, editing begins.
6) Rough cut is ready, senior producer reviews it and gives notes.
7) Fine cut goes to legal for vetting
8) Fine cut is done. Senior producer, executive producer and correspondent review
the piece. At this point, usually only small changes, if any, are made.
Nailing down the facts is always a critical job and of course, the devil is always
in the details. On his Hardball special, Chris Matthews referred to Mary Mapes
as an executive producer at first, which was wrong. Did his producer, on whom
he relies for the facts, get it wrong, or did Matthews misread it on the sheet
his producer gave to him? Also, the real truth about Mapes breaking the Abu Ghraib
story is that she didn't break it, her associate producer, Dana Robeson did.
Mapes wrongly took the credit for it. But as you can see, in the public's mind,
the myth that Mapes broke the story lives on and probably will forever.
Kristina Borjesson
Editor, INTO THE BUZZSAW: Leading Journalists Expose the Myth of a Free Press
A BUZZFLASH READER CONTRIBUTION
|
