Read this book? You'd rather not

"Lone Star" was a pretty good John Sayles movie and an OK brand of beer, and it is now the title of what looks to be a not very good quickie book about Dan Rather by a former CBS News producer who once worked for him.

Alan Weisman was at CBS News more than 25 years, or about half the time Rather was there, which means he's already skating on thin ice with the title of his book, Lone Star: The Extraordinary Life And Times of Dan Rather. When you realize Rather didn't sit for an interview with Weisman (as far as I can tell), that's not good, either. But the clincher is when Weisman writes that if Rather "mattered enough to be watched by untold millions of people for fifty years on television, then his story matters enough to be told as fully as possible." This for a book that is 221 pages long, plus back matter.  Wow, don't hold back.

Obviously, then, the story is not being told fully here.  Instead, my initial glances through Lone Star suggest that it is more of an attempt at insider analysis of the most celebrated newsman of his generation. Regarding Memogate, which chews up 17 of the 221 pages of the book, Weisman quotes a number of CBS insiders, including producers and correspondent Phil Jones, but no Dan.

I did read the Memogate chapter, in which Weisman largely criticizes the reporting of Rather's producer, Mary Mapes, from an insider's perspective, saying that her sources were dubious and she rushed the story onto air. But when it comes to what Weisman actually thought was wrong with the story, he seems determined not to give any comfort to Rather's critics on the Internet. On page 180 he writes, "The authenticity of the four documents shown in the report was certainly not bulletproof, to put it generously." But then on page 183 he writes:

Much of the critics' "proof" that the documents were fake, specifically, arguments over typeface and proportional spacing, later proved to be wrong, but this so-called proof was picked up without question by the mainstream media.

Excuse me? "Later proved to be wrong"? By whom? Two of the four handwriting experts employed by Mapes raised questions with the typeface and proportional spacing before the report aired, and had suggested consulting a 1970s typewriter expert. When executive producer Josh Howard finally consulted the expert, sadly after the story had aired, the Thornburgh-Boccardi report would later note that it was "an 'unsettling event' that shook his belief in the authenticity of the documents."

Subsequently, other typography experts have discredited the memos, too. This excruciatingly detailed Wikipedia summary of the disputations surrounding the memos' authenticity mentions a professor who emerged as a prominent critic of the critics. But Weisman's kidding himself if he thinks this guy "proved" the bloggers wrong.

I am amazed at how often veteran journalists will look down their noses at the blogocracy, calling them wannabes or pajamas media or whatnot, and then will proceed to do the very thing they accuse bloggers of doing: spreading innuendo without sourcing.  The bloggers got it wrong?  I'm sorry, did I miss something?  Did we find Times New Roman in the Pentagon's typewriter vault?  Did Mary Mapes get her job back?

Journalistic failings aside, Weisman seems more peeved about Memogate because it was about "an issue of little consequence." He writes that Mapes was actually going after much bigger fish -- namely that "criminal activity on the part of the future president" had gone on during his National Guard years "matters that, if true, were far more serious than his skipping Guard duty." That's fascinating ... again, if it were true. Otherwise it's simply hearsay being dredged up to sell a book.

There is the requisite amount of CBS insider gossip in Lone Star; Weisman manages, during the Memogate chapter, to work in a reference to "well documented charges" of sexual harassment against Don Hewitt filed in 1998, a case that was settled before said charges were divulged in detail. That kind of stuff should generate enough sales to cover the author's advance. But unless you are in the New York news media (and somehow didn't snare a free copy of the book), you can probably get by with what you read in press reports, like this one.

Finally, a word about the press release that was enclosed by the publisher, John Wiley and Sons. It begins:

THE POWER OF YOU!
How YOU Can Create Happiness, Balance and Wealth

By Scott Martineau

Oops.

Comments

[Alan Weisman]

Why don't you try reading the entire book before you print a judgement? Or is that too much to ask?

[Aaron]

Actually, having spent a couple of hours with the book, yes, it is too much to ask. Readers have been sufficiently advised as to the limitations of the review. And it's not as if I didn't pick the one chapter everybody's going to gravitate to anyway - come on.