Weekly Standard reviews the Rathergate case.
Rather Flawed
From the September 20, 2004 issue: New evidence emerges of media incompetence.
by Stephen F. Hayes
09/20/2004, Volume 010, Issue 02
LAST WEDNESDAY, CBS News's 60 Minutes II aired a report that strongly challenged George W. Bush's service in the National Guard. It's a story that has been explored dozens of times in the past five years. Two things in the 60 Minutes II story made it fresh--or, in newsroom parlance, gave it a peg. Ben Barnes, who served as attorney general in Texas at the time of Bush's service, claimed that he had been pressured to help Bush avoid going to Vietnam. But there were problems with Barnes's story, not least that he had previously, and rather specifically, denied the account he gave on 60 MinutesII. (Republicans questioned Barnes's motive, too, pointing out that he is a lifelong Democrat who has raised significant money for John Kerry's presidential campaign.)
The second news peg was more important. 60 Minutes II had obtained "new documents" from the "personal files" of the late Jerry Killian, Bush's commanding officer. That the documents were unearthed some 32 years after the activities they describe must have greatly excited the CBS producers who worked on the story.
According to an Associated Press story, the Killian memos "say Mr. Bush ignored a direct order from a superior officer and lost his status as a Guard pilot because he failed to meet military performance standards and undergo a required physical exam."
If accurate, then, the memos would provide documentary evidence to support the long-circling rumors that Bush received preferential treatment to get out of serving in Vietnam.
But almost immediately, the authenticity of the typed memos was questioned. Although CBS claimed to have had them reviewed by document experts, numerous forensic document examiners interviewed last Thursday by THE WEEKLY STANDARD and several other media outlets concluded that the documents were likely forgeries.
"These sure look like forgeries," said William Flynn, a forensic document expert widely considered the nation's top analyst of computer-generated documents. Flynn looked at copies of the documents posted on the CBS News website. "I would say it looks very likely that these documents could not have existed" in the early 1970s, he says, when they were allegedly written.
Several other experts agreed. "They look mighty suspicious," said a veteran forensic document expert who asked not to be quoted by name. Richard Polt, a Xavier University philosophy professor who operates a website dedicated to the history of typewriters, said that while he is not an expert on typesetting, the documents "look like typical word-processed documents." He adds: "I'm a Kerry supporter myself, but I won't let that cloud my objective judgment: I'm 99 percent sure that these documents were not produced in the early 1970s."
Philip Bouffard, another document expert who plans to vote for Kerry, reviewed the documents at the request of Bill Ardolino, a weblogger who runs INDC Journal. Says Bouffard: "It is remotely possible there is some typewriter that has the capability to do all this . . . but it is more likely these documents were generated in the common Times New Roman font and printed out on a computer printer that did not exist at the time they were supposedly created."
Sandra Ramsey Lines, a document expert from Arizona, told the Associated Press: "I'm virtually certain these were computer-generated."
The experts pointed to numerous irregularities in the Killian memos that aroused their suspicions. First, the typographic spacing is proportional, as is routine with professional typesetting and computer typography, not monospace, as was common in typewriters in the 1970s. (In proportional type, thin letters like "i" and "l" are closer together than thick letters like "W" and "M". In monospace, all the letters are allotted the same space.)
Second, the font appears to be identical to the Times New Roman font that is the default typeface in Microsoft Word and other modern word-processing programs. According to Flynn, the font is not listed in the Haas Atlas--the definitive encyclopedia of typewriter type fonts.
Third, the apostrophes are curlicues of the sort produced by word processors on personal computers, not the straight vertical hashmarks typical of typewriters. Finally, in some references to Bush's unit--the 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron--the "th" is a superscript in a smaller size than the other type. Again, this is typical (and often automatic) in modern word-processing programs.
There are also problems with the substance of the memos Killian allegedly authored. One of the memos, dated May 19, 1972, recounts a telephone conversation Killian is to have had with Bush. "I advised him of our investment in him and his commitment. I also told him I had to have written acceptance before he would be transferred, but think he's also talking to someone upstairs."
But as Byron York of National Review points out, Killian signed off on a "glowing report" about Bush on May 26, 1972, just one week later. Lt. Col. William D. Harris authored the memo praising Bush. "Lt. Bush is an exceptional fighter interceptor pilot and officer," it read. "He eagerly participates in scheduled unit activities." Killian signed below a statement indicating he agreed with Harris. "I concur with the comments and ratings of the reporting official."
Killian's son and widow also claim that Bush's commanding officer liked Bush and would have been unlikely to have authored the memos. "It just wouldn't happen," Gary Killian told the AP.
Despite these questions, CBS News anchor Dan Rather strongly defended the reporting on Friday's Evening News, and lashed out at those who would question CBS's reporting. "Today, on the Internet and elsewhere, some people--including many who are partisan political operatives--concentrated not on the key questions the overall story raised but on the documents that were part of the support of the story." After a long but relatively thin attempt at refuting the charges against CBS, Rather ended this way: "If any definitive evidence to the contrary of our story is found, we will report it. So far, there is none."
There are several steps CBS could take to clarify the situation.
(1) Obtain the original memos. CBS based its reporting on photocopies. If CBS can produce the original memos, both the paper and the ink can be accurately dated. And the paper can be checked for the indentations made by a typewriter.
(2) Produce other documents written by Killian around the same time that have the same characteristics as the documents in question.
(3) Find any typewriter from the early 1970s capable of producing replicas of the Killian memos. Several experts have already recreated the memos using Microsoft Word. Surely if the documents are authentic, somewhere there is a typewriter that can reproduce them.
If CBS can't provide more definitive evidence of the authenticity of the memos, its anchor will live to regret these words posted late Friday by Instapundit, Glenn Reynolds:
"To err is human but to really foul up requires a computer."
Who said them? Dan Rather.
Stephen F. Hayes is a staff writer at The Weekly Standard.
© Copyright 2004, News Corporation, Weekly Standard, All Rights Reserved. |
