one of these things that really helps you get through the day. if you see someone say something on tv you think is nuts -- and i'm not saying everything you write has to be full of animus or, you know, ill will or anything like that, but if something pisses you off, you know what you want to say. if you're just thinking something through, it's going to be a lot of thumb-sucking and on the one hand this, on the other hand that. and sometimes that's necessary in a column. but i think the most fun writing is when people actually have a sense of passion or energy about what they want to write about. >> >> host: great. thanks so much, jonah. it's been fantastic to chat with you. >> guest: thanks for having me. i really appreciate it. ..

>> what a crowd and what a wonderful space.

thank you for having us here. i'm going to ask questions for about half an hour and then turn it to the floor, and i will as somebody that has been in the news business all of my life focus on the news issues at the center of this, but lots of room to talk about journalism careers, the future of journalism, all of the stories dan has covered. he truly has been married and has done at starting with the civil rights movement, and i always say great stories make great journalists and people came out of world war ii i think he was by the civil rights movement by vietnam and watergate and we have all been

lucky to cover those stories. so, to start out this book if you haven't read, dan has always said that he holds no punches and this is a throw punches book and the people that were absolutely infuriated by what he says. he doesn't hold back what he believes, and i know him well enough that it's a genuine article and the underlying theme in all of this he writes about how his father liked to repeat the winston churchill never give up, never, never. and if there is a story of dan it is never give up, never,

never. and part of not giving up -- i want to start, we will talk a lot about the journalism but i want to talk about what i thought was one of the very special moments in this book. the end of the 44 years in cbs news when you called your self dan rather cbs news and you're out on the street is a very low moment and in a moment like that, he writes my out of the blue moment arrived courtesy george clooney and now he receives an award for the movie good night and good luck and he invited me to los angeles to present it to him. he put me out in a first rate hotel. i sat with him and they couldn't have been a more genuine.

george clooney never said anything about cbs or the broadcast or the feinberg report except for one offhand comment said quietly s he turned his head close to my year. so you got screwed, he whispered. happens all the time in my business. forget it. that had to be a great moment. >> was a great moment. george is that kind of person? >> he is. it's very easy when someone marks in hollywood and has a program as high as george clooney to create a public image of him as a hard-working really good guy. i don't want to out my part here. he is the real thing. he cares a lot about what's happening in the world. he keeps up with what is happening in the world, and

given his schedule as an actor and being in the public eye, you have to admire that. >> but to a degree you did forget it and got a new job working, producing 42 hours of programming every year. but to a degree you didn't forget it. six years ago was well covered at the time. you took this to a court case that was eventually dismissed by the appellate court. why was it important to you to still go back over this to write a book about it why do you think it's important for people to know about it and read about it? >> very good question. i still got to write this book because i wanted to tell stories. i think i'm a pretty good storyteller on my best days.

i should become a being a reporter all this time and the stories of the sort you tell your family or friends around the fireplace they see what was it like to interview saddam hussein or what was it like in vietnam, what was richard nixon like and these are stories i tell. i wanted to put them between hard covers, which is true. again, i had moved on. i had moved away on. i am at peace. i'm happier in my work than i would have ever been, but i have a dilemma. if i do a book that doesn't deal with what happened at cbs news why it happened, how it happened, then the book would be dismissed. on the other hand if i do put it

in the book and speak candidly in the book so i decided okay, i'm going to write the book the way i want to and include a chapter or two. all little bit less than one-fourth of this book has to do with the bush national guard story and what happened to me at cbs. but that said, i'm not after revenge or redemption. however, it's been a long time ago. bush almost ran eight years ago. it's not something to go back every day. it's simply not the case. >> this is a partisan town so partisan question. you have painted way back in the

nixon years has the icon of the liberals, the person that has it been for the republicans. if i am an average guy that has heard that all of my life and then i see that campaign in september you are running a story about george bush and his weapon and national guard and i am asked to say maybe those conservatives are right and he really has it been for republicans. going and coming you knew good and well that would be the charge. >> the story was true. one could talk for days about the document, but the story of george bush or the lack of it is not something that i contend.

he got in the national guard because it was his father is the position. fact. while he was supposed to be on duty he disappeared for a year. if you are in the u.s. army and you disappear you are in a heap of trouble. this is the story. it's an inconvenient time to come out. the accusations that you outlined have been around since at least the time of dr. martin luther king in the civil rights movement. i think that most people understand that my experience in the audience at large as the understand it. that as a reporter if you are worried of being an american

reporter your role is to be an honest broker of information. in that role if you report stories that are highly partisan political people and exceptionally committed to the logical people then they are going to start calling you names. with martin luther king and the civil rights movement because i was from cbs we recall the color broadcasting system. out of that group rather it is pro liberal. my answer to that has always been you are what your record is personally take a look at the

record. it's what is called a transitional neighborhood in texas. that is a poor neighborhood. i never saw the inside of the evening in elementary middle school, high school and college having gone to the public school institutions. i volunteered twice in the u.s. military and was deemed in the army. i lied about it and got to confess and i was in the marines for a short time. i had one of the shortest distinguished records in the history of the marine corps. [laughter] with no connections with anybody i started at the very bottom and worked my way up. i was born and raised in texas. i didn't see anything anyplace else. now this is the record.

does this sound like the record of some communist socialist liberal person? i am with every president that we've covered. i have a helluva time with johnson who because i am a texan i did an interview with jimmy carter we asked him to grade himself and without realizing it he gave himself a c plus. [laughter] i think that he deserves a somewhat better than that. so, in some i know what my record is both personally and professionally. i certainly have my falls and i've made my mistakes, but my life is dedicated to be an honest broker of information, please no favorites, throw no

punches, don't back down. i'm not a particularly brave person, but professionally it may not be the right time to run a story. if you may have to face the furnace and take the heat. but if you are going to be a reporter, if you are going to be a lifetime reporter. >> let me take you to one of the underlining things in the book is how journalism has changed and how the corporate environment for journalism has changed, and the manner in which the fire wall that used to exist between these divisions and the corporation never in hinged on those has changed, and an important thing for journalists for the big part of the book you

begin with the abu ghraib story. they broke the story of the extreme measures being taken on the prison that most people see as prison, the gruesome pictures that came out of that. they had that. they are the ones that broke that story. but in the book this is where people would be infuriated by you basically said and you can correct me if i'm saying it wrong that the corporation did not want the story to run, didn't want the story to run because it's controversy all and you know people will get upset

but for some circumstances, cbs would have buried the story and stop the story from coming out. why are you that sure? >> well, because i was there. i was there, and i ought to know the story as i outlined was i didn't realize at the time the beginning of the end for me. i am convinced of that and yes that is my opinion. we like the story. we've worked on it a long time. the abuses.

i said to myself i know people in the u.s. military and i don't believe this is the case. and also i said to myself i certainly hope it is not the case, but we confirm it as this industry that we have witnessed at the people there were there from the very beginning those in the commission who worked closely with those in the corporate were nervous about it and for good reason. you have to take the heat by eight. so we have already have the story, it's totally confirmed. but you have to have the pictures. so we got pictures. we worked them together so to speak and there is a three week

period that became increasingly apparent to me. they don't want to own the story. we had this story exclusively and they didn't want to own it and they kept delaying it. they believe it until it became obvious some of the sources kept calling and said when are you going to run, it's not going to run this week may be next week. we were not going to run the story and so some of them contacted one of the great investigative reporters. had it not been the footsteps coming up behind us i don't think they would run at first, but their attitude was this is so controversial. it's going to bring down so much heat that the corporate entity which has all kinds of interest

in washington they need legislation passed and stopped. it became very healthy. they didn't want to run it. i'm not saying they would never run it but they didn't want to do his own the story. this is a worldwide exclusive of those that say what's the big deal about that? you have this kind of story in the cbs news i would say on any story anywhere would never -- >> we ran a early in 2004 and the network was really nervous about. they didn't run a gauntlet of the information.

the bush story came along in the timber. they want to take 60 minutes to schedule. they would argue it wasn't doing that well. the argument that alladi and others made is you can't take this program off the air for weeks or months after the story people are going to make the connection and say okay we will even the schedule. but i do say in the book that led to the conclusion while i didn't realize it at that time. islamic let me take one of the things that happened when the story came out.

was one of the first examples of the internet hitting and we are now seeing this happen in this campaign, within hours there was a controversy and charges through the blogosphere phony people claiming to be experts in documents that immediately took off on the internet which set out a fire storm, which again for the corporation in the news division caused this we don't need this controversy which grows and grows and becomes in the 24-hour world and more and more politicized world.

you write that all of that was dead wrong. >> in general particularly cbs news was unprepared. >> evin the independent >> evin the independent commission was chosen among george bush's friends to investigate what we did. when we accused blogs and the internet things of that type was wrong. let me point out if their campaign to counter attack the basic truth of the story if

george bush got preferential treatment and disappeared for year when he's supposed to be on duty they couldn't attack then so they would put a smokescreen it's not the truth of the story it's using the document to this day because of the campaign will recall the smokescreen campaign. i believe they were genuine and i believe now no one has proven the permission but you read in here time after time with this is we can't determine whether they are or not we will.

but i do understand what everyone thinks about the documents five sit here in a short version of what i told in the book if anybody is interested in the details on of the things about the document it is in the process by which reporters get the truth. it's whether they get to the truth or as close to the truth as humanly possible the president in his division and i said to him mr. hayward, you know the story is true. that's not the point. here is the leader of a major network news operation that says it's not the point whether the story is true or not. the point is they are held in every direction by one part, only one part would you use to support the story. that's what happened. that's what happened as detailed

in the book and recognize the interest in this but for most leaders it seven years ago. >> i'm going to open this up to the floor and a second, but i want to turn to dan so i may not be the best educated but i can help work anybody, which is absolutely true. i was the executive producer on nightline after 14 years and we were on the field chasing dan come and ted and i would say if you are continuing with dan you might win the one word es to. you might talk a on day three that this is can't be one week story or two weeks story dan is

going to win those days because we are just going to lose steam and he is going to be picking up speed. to a degree for all of us that have a lot to go they may work way past 65 caduet 874 get knocked to the ground at age 80 between 42 hours a year on the plans to afghanistan constantly. >> i've always had a great passion for covering news stories. it began when i was four or 5-years-old.

i appreciate all of the complimentary things that you said but i am reminded of what abraham lincoln once said. he said never take the time to deny it. the audience will find out the truth soon enough for themselves. [laughter] the reason i still do it is because i still love it. i can't wait to get to work. i've always had a high curiosity. it's true i'm not the smartest correspondent by a long shot. i don't learn fast, but i learn good and i do work hard. the basic answer is i simply love what i do and i have a passion and i think it's important for quality journalism and integrity. journalism at its best is extremely important to the

country as a whole not just journalists as myself we don't think about it often enough in my opinion that a free and independent, truly independent press is the red beating heart of freedom and democracy and a drizzle one defeat could journalism at its best serves as a check and balance on the country. what ever one thinks of the abu ghraib story. we spoke truth about power. when you do that there's going to be french bidet and we paid the price for it. you may say it's justified to understand how digging into the investigative reporting is in american journalism. in very short supply and now there are a lot of reasons for

it. other being the corporate decision and the public position of the news not to mention the trivialization of the news but whether you read the book or not or early you like the book or not, i do ask you to think part of the importance of independent journalism to keep digging investigated a journalism. >> can i invite questions from the floor? >> my job is to work the news. i was scheduled for this evening but i asked to leave the job for one day to come down and say thank you for telling the truth. the national tragedy was happening. one of these networks for 45 years now and i haven't seen that happen and it is a genuine

tragedy. thank you very much for writing this. [applause] >> hello, how are you tonight? >> i'm curious what is the most profound story and how does it affect your life? >> that is a good question and i'm going to try to answer. it's hard for me to pick one. what you are looking at year is a reporter that got lucky, very lucky. i was able to top. it's always difficult to get one story, but i was trying because when i covered the books for cbs news when i first came to work i was going to talk about martin

luther king and what was then a supervised movement. that coverage changed me as a professional and as a man. i grew up in the segregated society institutionalized which is to say restaurants and so on from georgia and south carolina. on a day-by-day, week by week basis to cover the civil rights movement i could not believe some of the things that i saw. i have heard about them and they had them perhaps later but i had never seen one. it chills went through me and i

could only imagine what went through the mind of people of color. i couldn't believe the police in any city let alone in america and the administration would turn fire hoses on women and children and nonviolent march. i couldn't believe it would turn vicious dogs on them but it would go on television so if i had one story to influence them the most, that would be it. >> i was wondering if you would share your time of the kennedy assassination. >> thank you for the question. i was pulled away from the coverage of the civil rights

movement to study president kennedy's trip to texas which was a somewhat routine political trip to the state in preparation and the 64 campaign, presidential campaign. when president kennedy was assassinated when the president was assassinated, saturday when his assassin was interrogated it still seems almost incredible to me when the assassin was assassinated and then of course the national mourning mac in the funeral monday as a reporter and as a journalist, the immediate reaction that i had when we determine the president is dead and they broke that story.

i had the same reaction to almost every american in any political persuasion had and that is a deep emotional reaction. but, at that point i said to myself the same version of the same thing. i can't go through this and emotionally. i am a pro. everything else has to be driven down. the story is the only thing that counts, find out what we find out and report it. i didn't sleep much of those days working around the clock and about a week later or about the time the country was coming out of it i went through my deep emotional time i recognized to

this day there's a lot of speculation and controversy of who killed the president, why come and did they have held. i will submit a fair amount of my career pursuing those questions. the cbs news investigation was part of others over the years. if we can demonstrate that others were shooting at the time or people helped him we couldn't do that. this is what i believe. he was of shooter, of the shooter, the only person shooting. that's number one. number two, there is no

conclusive evidence that anybody helped him given the commission report kept their mind open to such things well we don't know we ought to keep investigating and be open minded the ongoing investigations and investigated it a lot doesn't mean that the overwhelming evidence in my did mind is that all is well was the only shooter whether he had to help the russians there are

theories that sound true and a compass of evidence we found no conclusive evidence or any persuasive testimony or witness testimony that others remain open-minded about it and bring this all the evidence, bring me solid witness testimony. >> thank you for coming tonight. i have a question. i grew up in a middle class family watching you and we look forward to the broadcast. >> it's not news any more and if he is coming back around. >> if it is in this book what

you say is true, they overwhelm the news values not only in television journalism there are a few exceptions. it's always been this struggle in terms of television. should television be an instrument to educate to inform to teach citizens or should it be entertainment? the owners at the time is the way we are going to go so there has always been a struggle between the views and entertainment trying to keep the bankers from entertainment trying to keep the values and indeed overwhelmed with news values. ed murrow's book about this is by far the best everest in the late 1950's when he was leading

the struggle. entertainment is important to society. it has much to contribute but they are different from the news vendors and on television he argued for and some of thus succeeded him have tried to carry this in my case not very well but this is certainly a network of overwhelming entertainment but should be in for a long time there was at least a small part of it operated in the public interest that took the attitude of the public journal public trust and the network owners or business people we want to make money when it comes to the news as a public-service our way of contributing. it just about disappeared alstom

producer of the programs of this country would attest. if you walk into any corporate high ivory tower and say a prime time hour at minot or 10:00 at night on afghanistan or what is happening in sudan because that is in the public interest. these days if you suggested that what two things would happen? dewitt send a candidate for a mental institution -- [laughter] or they would think your smoking something very expensive. the demographics would be poor and we would be in afghanistan once every three days of the evening news but primetime hour forget it, so so the straub and

intertek avenues and the struggle between entertainment to make money with shareholder value is opposed to news service that is now been decided. let me say i don't want anyone to misinterpret. i've never worked for a commercial broadcasting enterprise. i'm not into a corporate or anticapitalism. i believe in both. but with the consolidation of the media to the point we have now reached the stage no more than six my cat is for but very large international companies who have other kinds of visions with its productions and all kinds of things they own better than 80% in the country.

my point these very large corporations and i mentioned this before, they make things out of powers in washington whether republican or democrat. they need to increase their business and increase their profits. the powers of washington. things like the campaign contributions in this year it will be 3 billion-dollar presidential campaign that money has to come from somewhere much comes from the story large corporations the big business is indented with big government and i argue not very well but whether you're republican or democrat and consider yourself a conservative reactionary, will progressive this is not what we

want. we need more competition, we get more to the carless competition. there is hope. much in my own mind is believed the internet will continue to grow as a source for news, but as we move forward i am an optimist that i think people are waking up to what i just described of these three large corporations being in bed with the power centers in washington, and i don't -- i mean a revolution in the streets. people need to wake up to this and we are americans. one of the things we do best is we adjust. we adjust. we rebuilt if you will better, faster than anybody in the industry could grow and so looking forward i am determined.

thank you. >> good evening mr. rather. this is more of a comment than a question. when you took over the cbs evening news we talked of the assassination [inaudible] we just needed to know and that is one of the merits and started talking about the human aspect side of it and the politics say i'm sorry. i'm sorry. there is no reason to be sorry because in those moments it

shows what makes you a good journalist and so i want the opportunity to say thank you. [applause] >> a quick thing is the we are very lucky in that moment all of whom had 20 years' experience and that moment when the president was an air force one and there was no place to go, there were three people but we have seen for decades that new, and at the moment like that in the kennedy assassination the only place to go was television, and though there were many news network's at that time, the huge ponder vince went to those three men because they knew them and

that is a critical role of television. >> i appreciate you being here this evening. i would like to talk about how you used to go about and still do how they differ in the capacity about the major investigative projects, planning and executing them and sort of what criteria you use and how long it takes and a little bit about your problem. >> my hearing is not what it once was. >> how do you print the stories in the investigative journalism and then how you perceive. >> it is to say people know things, they are afraid to review things themselves, so perhaps they whisper to a priest or confide in their wife or

girlfriend to give a call and say you should look into this or that or the other in that way. other times it is based on the experience. you look at something and it's very important for a journalist to be skeptical but never cenacle. we have a reputation along the way of the cynics. frequently the way the investigation starts is someone in power will say something and you say okay. let's find out. sometimes it's true although a lot of times it isn't.

the stories come in all sizes and all directions and sometimes it is just hard to enjoy journalism when i talk about that if you are a curious person or a someone came to us and said write us a letter. do you realize in the world wide basis how many prescription drugs are counterfeit druggists? well, i've heard something. you have no idea. well, we got the letter and to my surprise in some parts of africa 60 to 70% of the prescription drugs are fake. they are counterfeit and contain

things like baking powder, sawdust, all kinds of junk. they are delivered in boxes and exactly the right prescription. the containers have the same box on them. i use it as an example we found was even worse than we had been told. i use that as an example. >> once you decide the story that you are going to cover and that is a big decision because the investigative journalism is among the most expensive form of journalism is the reason we have so little of it these days. this is expensive and time-consuming and when you go down the alley and get to the end of it isn't what you thought was there. you have to be careful on the stories. once you select the story is the

pictures are important and we have to have something to put on the screen. the most difficult kind of investigative stories are those in which no pictures, no action pictures are available. television is at its best when it takes you there but it has its weaknesses and one of the weaknesses are the context, perspective, background and you can't take a picture of an idea, so sometimes you just say it's picture poor, sometimes it happens in journalism and seven television say this is a great story but its picture poor so we look for something. that gives you any insight into how it works. >> thank you very much.

>> we have time for four more questions. we will take to on this side. >> thank you for your time. i have a simple question i wanted to know what your opinion was on the wikileaks web site. >> i always talk straight to you and i have from the beginning been somewhat stripped in my own mind about wikileaks to be a part of me on some days says this was a great thing. it's exposed a lot. there was news. one definition of news i wish it was original but it isn't is that the news is important for people to know. somebody somewhere very often some powerful people somewhere do not want people to know.

all the rest is just advertising. so part of me it just dump all kinds of things. that may be true, but in dumping of this information they put the lives of risk in terms of intelligence offices, sources, intelligence and that is not a good thing. so we don't cut the question and giving. what do i think about it? but i hate to say over all i think wikileaks formation is worthwhile but i am concerned.

with the dedicated society listen, give us the information and we can decide what to make of it. thanks. >> thank you. >> i grew up in austin watching the evening news every night and my understanding of the news is that it came out of your mouth and only your mouth. what are your thoughts on my generation now transitioning that you and the other institution the media has read studies that more people my age watch steven colbert and john stuart than any other form of news programs. do you feel like what was such a huge part of your life being the evening news that some day people like me are never even going to understand what was like? >> i don't worry about it because time has moved on. but at the heart of the question

i've responded if it isn't true already i believe it is true but most people will get used to the news in the internet. the internet has its problems. the only idea that you could smear somebody's reputation, your neighbors or former boyfriend or girlfriend with anonymity. but moving forward, the internet power to communicate more information including news is the greatest that we've ever had. i'm old enough to remember when people said radio? newspapers are dead. then television came along and said. that hasn't worked out.

it's been supplemental. as for the evening news, it's only my opinion, but i think that in the evening news as you have known it and we still know it to a degree it wouldn't surprise me if one of the big networks over the next three to seven years decided not to do the evening news wouldn't surprise me at all as we move forward, again, i'm optimistic about that. new things will come along. right now the problem is finding a business model to pay for international reporting in the investigative reporting quality journalism to find a way to pay for it with very few exceptions on the internet but i think they will and that is the reason i'm

optimistic moving forward. the evening news is now constructive and lasts for decades or not we will find a way. >> thank you. >> we are coming into a presidential election. i'm wondering what your view is in terms of the role of journalists covering politicians and that exchange per sample talking about the fact that kennedy and that political career and what you thought about that and where we are going. >> the nature of campaign coverage like everything else changes as we go along the this month has not changed. the reporters i think i used the phrase earlier the good ones are

dedicated to be honest brokers of the information. the most underreported the story in every presidential campaign in which i've covered and i've been covering the presidential campaign since 1952 is to follow the money come follow the dollar. i mentioned this before we are at the age it takes $3 billion for a presidential campaign all of the money is counted, and dhaka question of top-quality political coverage in general particularly the presidential race i think is to try to answer the question who is giving what money to whom expecting to get what? that's not to say that the experts say of the candidates won't be part and parcel of coverage. i hope that the coverage i've

just described to you that's the single most important thing. in many ways coverage of the presidential campaign is better now than has been at any time i can remember because there are more reporters covering the campaign in general and more outlets and the networks and small satellite cable radio and yes, the internet to say nothing of the development of individual saying listen, this is my view. i'm not pessimistic about the campaign coverage. i don't think that there has ever been enough and there might not be enough this year to answer the question of who gives us money expecting to get what. thank you.

>> someone who has witnessed these reports to the days of the internet, to what degree do you see that the public is getting the truth of the major news that we public should know? >> we talked about one of the big problems is entertainment values of overwhelming news values. many programs on the television set today news programs are not news programs from their entertainment, they're designed to be entertainment programs, and thus development of the trendline instead of sending reporters to cover the war in afghanistan or iraq or to cover what is happening in africa instead of having them what the ground shouting about their