In her first interview since being fired, former CBS News producer Mary Mapes maintains that her controversial "60 Minutes II" story on President Bush's National Guard service was "true" and that "no one has proved that the documents were not authentic."
Mapes was fired after an independent panel found her basic reporting was "faulty."
In her interview with ABC News chief investigative correspondent Brian Ross, to be broadcast Wednesday morning on "Good Morning America," Mapes says she is unrepentant about her role. "I don't think I committed bad journalism. I really don't," she says.
[...]
Mapes says she is continuing to investigate the source of the controversial documents whose authenticity was seriously questioned by the CBS panel. She tells Ross that she had no journalistic obligation to prove the authenticity of the documents before including them in the "60 Minutes II" report. "I don't think that's the standard," she said.
Mapes says one of her few regrets in handling the story was her phone call to a member of Sen. John Kerry's Presidential campaign staff prior to the broadcast. "I wish to God I hadn't done it, because I think it was so wildly misinterpreted." She says she made the call only as a way to gain favor with the source who provided her with the documents.
Mapes rejects suggestions she had political motives. "I did not have it in for George Bush," she said.
Mapes also criticizes other reporters for spending too much time on her story and other flawed journalism. "I think the media's had more fun beating itself up in the last five years than it has asking hard questions of the administration or government officials, and I think that's wrong," she said.
Mapes tells Ross she feels in no way responsible for what happened at CBS News in the wake of her "60 Minutes II" report.
"If you're talking about an investigation that basically gutted a news organization, and turned people one against another and made people afraid of each other, and really scooted the country's most experienced anchor out of his anchor chair, and now has the evening news casting about for some kind of format that will be zippy and new, I didn't do that. I had absolutely nothing to do with any of that," she said.
Another question that continues to be asked is: Are the documents fake?
Nothing I’ve seen leads me to believe they are authentic. The Thornburgh-Boccardi report (pdf) makes painfully clear that the documents used in the “60 Minutes Wednesday” report were neither authenticated nor believable in many ways. They certainly did not come remotely close to meeting standards for air. The report, written by lawyers in a style only lawyers can love, found that the panel could not prove the documents to be forgeries. (ed: actually their type expert, in an appendix, did call them fakes) But, to this day, no one has discovered where they came from or who may have written them. In any case, it was CBS’ responsibility to prove they were authentic, not for anyone else to prove they were fake.
Points made in the report — from the failure to trace the documents to the conflicting statements given by Bill Burkett as to how he came into possession of them to questions raised by experts about them prior to air — lead me to conclude they are not authentic. And from various discussions, I haven’t found anyone else at CBS who believes otherwise.
Some continue to claim that even if the documents are fake, the gist of the story is true somehow. Wrong. The documents were presented as evidence to prove the story’s accuracy. The fact that they have been discredited undermines the veracity of the entire story, and it’s not an acceptable defense of it.
Go back to J School, Mary. (hat tip: Paul at Wizbang)
11/9/05 0800: Others on the case - Rick Moran
The story of Mary Mapes is classic tragedy. There are two elements that mark the difference between tragedy and melodrama. The first is the main character’s “tragic flaw” which is usually one of the seven deadly sins. In Mapes case, you can take your pick; pride, envy, or anger will do. But it is the second element in tragedy that is the most difficult to achieve for both the playwright and the actor playing the tragic character. And that is the character’s cluelessness regarding why they are suffering this downfall.
How seriously can you take a journalist who produces a report yet who doesn't feel obligated to prove the authenticity of documents that are the report's underpinnings? Objective journalists examine the facts and come to a conclusion. Propagandists start with a conclusion then attempt to buttress it with truths, half-truths and out-and-out lies.
Tragedy and comedy, all at once.
