Good for Rather. He's damned right that the essential business of gathering information, once called reporting, is increasingly neglected and in its place we get a lot of hot air, especially on television. Very rarely does television uncover anything at all.

Just more blather from Rather. Please go away. You lost all objectivity with that Bush stunt. A saving grace is Couric is more incompetent than you were.

I met a colleague of Rather's a few years back and he was very forthright in saying that Rather has always lived and worked on the edge of normal psychological boundaries. In short, his message was he did countless reckless things to the point of literally putting his own life and others at risk. Whether you'd call that courage or irrational, you must give him credit for not holding back - something you don't see from corporate bought talking heads now days.

Rather was fired from CBS. His reporting, which he considers highly valuable, was so substandard on the Bush story that he should have been sued for professional malpractice.

He tells us he "wants the public to see" how a corporation manhandles a 100% victim named Dan. We don't care, you know. That corporation made you a millionaire, Mr. Rather. Don't come to us with your hard luck story. It rings hollow, like the Bush story that did you in.

Has anyone ever discussed that the information in the Bush file which got Rather in trouble was actually true? The docs were forged but the info was true? I'm a real Bush hater. My hatred is abating somewhat now he is out of office. I can understand the "birthers" who I think are idiots. Oh Lou Dobbs, is it early dementia? The birthers hate Obama so much that they are desperately trying to find something against him. I hated Bush that way. I will always like Dan Rather, because I can remember him geting beaten down at the 68 Democratic convention. I think Dan really enjoyed that.

"Gathering" news? Rather will be remembered for manufacturing news with his embarrassing forged document piece re President Bush's time in the service. Disgraceful actions by a journalist. What I can't understand is why CBS stayed with him all those years he came in 3rd? Did he have forged pictures of the CEO?

I'll have to agree with Rather's insightful comments about News Gathering. It is clearly a missing ingredient these days, mostly as a result of budget cuts in print and TV news organizations, but also because ratings were never that good for boilerplate news, which is what is produced from News Gathering Operations. Some of the News Gathering wasn't helpful to the National Debate, and Rather is as guilty as anyone else for turning Vietnam into an anti-establishment piece instead of it being simply an inappropriate idea to begin with piece, which is how that War ended up anyway. If you are looking for a massive case of cultural stupidity, look at the Vietnam War. All Wars are caused by Cultural Blindness. There was simply never any reason for us to be in Vietnam in the first place.

A similar situation occurred in Iraq, proving yet again how swift and steep the learning curve is for us Americans, who like nothing better than to jump right back into the fire after being scalded twice, first in Korea, and then again in Vietnam. The internet, if anything, not only gathers news from International sources, but it edits the news with comment. That comment is subject to review by sensible minds and is either found to be worthwhile, or simply junk. That is the marketplace of 'ideas' being tested, and surely this is an evolution above News Gathering and opinion and ideas being monopolized by the sponsors of the CBS Evening News. Stories about bad bicycles, for example, would never appear on the Evening News, but abound on the internet, first because there wasn't the time for it at CBS and second because the Sponsors who built the bicycles would go ballistic. None of those problems exist on the internet. The commenters/bloggers simply don't care who approves. Most barely care if anyone reads this stuff. But if they do and some good can be pulled out of the world simply because the competition for 'ideas' is greater on the internet, then let the contest begin. We will all benefit for sorting ideas properly before acting.

There is another point too which is being missed by Rather. There are different kinds of people in the world, some of whom you will not like or approve of, simply because their talents and abilities defy science. Their results do not. There are many bloggers on the internet who have a sharper eye than the TV News Evangelist that Rather played for so many years. Do not misunderstand me, I enjoyed Dan Rather immensely, but Walter Cronkite will always be my favorite. Personality has a lot to do with life and I just liked Walter better than Dan, but Dan was the ultimate field reporter of all time, I have no question about that, so naturally his interest lies elsewhere than others. No one interest is more sacred than another...'so sayeth the Lord God Almighty', and miraculously it turns out that way in real life, just as it did in Vietnam. To hear Dan Rather tell the story, some interests are greater than other interests and to that there is no proof. Let the marketplace of reasonable minds determine what is read...not the other way around.

The best part of the internet is meeting new people and experiencing the world remotely from your own Living Room. It is astounding how different and similar we all are. But as Kennedy pointed out, 'We are all mortal' and to that end we seek solutions and 'ideas' in order to make a hostile planet inhabitable for as many people as is possible, only to then reinvent ourselves in ways never imagined before. This is not just the American Story, though it certainly is a large thread which runs through our lives as Americans, but it is also the interest of the world at large....and for that no one ought be surprised.

Besides, I get all of my best cooking recipes on the internet. You can't do that on the CBS Evening News with Dan Rather.

I worked for newspapers for years. Granted it was a long time ago, but the rule back then was no story ended up in print that didn't have three reliable sources, and three quotes from three different people. None of us reporters/editors felt this was an undue hardship, it was considered the norm. http://newsy1.wordpress.com

Dan Rather screwed up bigtime on the Bush National Guard story. And it cost him bigtime.

But, he's absolutely correct in this interview in his take on the state of the media and the danger that is posed by losing professional journalism to the blogosphere.