Too toxic for "60 Minutes"?

May 5, 2014 6:41 AM

A decade after "Rathergate," 60 Minutes correspondent Lara Logan was badly duped by a security contractor who claimed to have been an eyewitness to and to have fought in the Benghazi battle that eventually killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and was subsequently asked to take a leave of absence by CBS. CBS itself was forced to apologize. Now, NY Magazine asks "Can 60 Minutes Afford to Take Lara Logan Back?"
posted by nevercalm (42 comments total)

Whoops, forgot one: How the ’60 Minutes’ Benghazi debacle is similar, different than Rathergate
posted by nevercalm at 6:51 AM on May 5, 2014

The tone of that article is incredibly sexist and patronizing, even if she is a lousy reporter.
posted by empath at 6:58 AM on May 5, 2014 [7 favorites]

I'm sure Fox News would be happy to have her.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 7:06 AM on May 5, 2014 [9 favorites]

wouldn't it have been her producer's job to find and vet interviewees? If her producer was not asked to take a leave of absence as well, that's pretty fucked up.
posted by spicynuts at 7:08 AM on May 5, 2014 [4 favorites]

Her producer is/was Max McClellan, and he was also put on leave-of-absence after the Dylan Davies Benghazi story turned out to be false. At the time, McClellan defended the story and Logan, saying that the story checked out and he saw no reason to doubt anything that was reported.
posted by zarq at 7:13 AM on May 5, 2014 [3 favorites]

She should be forced to do a major story on how she was duped, who was behind it, their motives and methods.

Otherwise, she should look for a different career.
posted by Repack Rider at 7:24 AM on May 5, 2014 [34 favorites]

The sad thing is that this all seems of a piece for 60 Minutes, a show I rarely if ever miss, but which has in the last few years really gone down the tubes, investigative-journalism-wise. To have this reporter traipsing all over Iraq and Afghanistan filing fawning reports about the US military and their missions all over the world really must have Don Hewitt and Mike Wallace absolutely spinning in their graves.
posted by nevercalm at 7:38 AM on May 5, 2014 [8 favorites]

The New York Magazine article contains additional details, btw. It notes that McClellan is more conservative than producers traditionally are at CBS and 60 Minutes, which may have influenced his credulity. It notes that the story would have appealed to Logan on many levels (conservative political message, patriotism, "heroic special-forces operators being let down by politicians and bureaucrats thousands of miles from the front", etc., etc). The narrative might have raised eyebrows if it had been vetted by people who weren't inclined to believe it.

The people above McClellan:

CBS' senior vice-president of standards and practices, Linda Mason had left in early 2013 and was never replaced. Her job was to provide an objective, outside perspective that would scrutinize stories. The State Department and the FBI were not called to fact-check Davies’s claims. His book was being published by a CBS sister company, and as a result the show chose not to vet it thoroughly.

Jeff Fager is Chairman of CBS News and the Executive Producer of 60 Minutes. He didn't vet the story. Under normal circumstances all stories would be scrutinized by him prior to air, marked with his comments and edited according to his wishes. But instead he delegated that task to 60 Minutes Executive Editor Bill Owens. Owens apparently didn't do it properly. Which is interesting, because he's worked with Logan for years.

Despite this article's emphasis on her supposedly using sex and sex appeal to unfairly get ahead, the fact remains that Logan is an Emmy award-winning journalist who has also won a slew of other journalism awards for high-quality, on-the-ground reporting. But she got conned, hard, and the fact that the story made it to air speaks volumes about both her own personal biases and those of her producer and bosses -- and their willingness to trust her so far as to disregard or ignore proper vetting procedure.
posted by zarq at 7:46 AM on May 5, 2014 [15 favorites]

the last few years really gone down the tubes

I think we should go back into the early to mid '90s in order to correctly pinpoint where the whole thing started to sour. IMO, it just got as stale as its viewers over the years and was in no shape to compete against the information machine it was reporting on.
posted by jsavimbi at 7:48 AM on May 5, 2014 [4 favorites]

I think we should go back into the early to mid '90s in order to correctly pinpoint where the whole thing started to sour.

That sounds about right. I'm sure there is a great book waiting to be written on the decline of 60 minutes and CBS news in general. Probably something about the arrival of 24 hour news competition, the lack of new blood among on-air reporters, the decline in status and viewing of nightly evening news broadcasts, and the near-death of quality journalism in the internet age, etc...

(if this book exists already - let me know!)
posted by boubelium at 8:10 AM on May 5, 2014 [1 favorite]

She should be forced to do a major story on how she was duped, who was behind it, their motives and methods.

I think that would be an incredible thing to watch. Couple it with something like "If you'd like to fact-check this story yourself, visit 60minutes.com/duped." I mean put that after every story.

CBS has the chance to rise, phoenix-like, from this--and drive similar change at competing orgs.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 8:11 AM on May 5, 2014 [1 favorite]

I think we should go back into the early to mid '90s in order to correctly pinpoint where the whole thing started to sour.

That sounds about right. I'm sure there is a great book waiting to be written on the decline of 60 minutes and CBS news in general.

1995
posted by TedW at 8:21 AM on May 5, 2014 [3 favorites]

NBC isn't immune to this either. (1992)
posted by spikeleemajortomdickandharryconnickjrmints at 8:28 AM on May 5, 2014

"When Al Qaeda attacked New York on 9/11, prompting the invasion of Afghanistan, Logan realized that it was the story of her career." Ambition in conflict journalism--from a journalist of any gender--makes me feel icky. On that same note, I'm not reading the patronizing or sexist tones that have been mentioned above. I'm reading frankness about a very ambitious person who (1) is aware of the tools in her toolkit and has no qualms about using them as such, and (2) has been treated very patronizingly by the sexist press for what seems like her entire career.

“Men play on the military thing, they play on the macho thing, they play on the brotherhood thing,” [Logan] told a reporter. “No one accuses them of using gender to their advantage. The fact is that sometimes being a woman can open doors for you, but more often than not it makes things more difficult.”
posted by late afternoon dreaming hotel at 8:29 AM on May 5, 2014 [2 favorites]

Yeah, The New York Magazine article makes it sounds like the CBS News brass is the root of the problem. While I don't particularly like Logan, she's a small part of 60 Minutes' decline over the years. I would've liked to hear more about Jeff Fager, as it sounds like he's the real cause for concern:

“Fager has gotten rid of any structural oversight,” says a former 60 Minutes producer. “He doesn’t like people challenging him. There’s nobody to go to if you have a problem.”

and

“Jeff believes in popular TV,” says a colleague. “The part of the business that involves reporting scary stories, on which you have to spend time and resources on investigations and fact-checking and sources—all of that annoys the hell out of him.”

I don't think any one person can be blamed for 60 Minutes' decline, but it sure sounds like Fager has hastened it.
posted by mokin at 8:31 AM on May 5, 2014 [3 favorites]

It's easy to say that she crossed some kind of unforgivable line, that "she should look for a different career."

How many of us have made big mistakes in jobs? Crossed certain ethical lines of our profession? But, how many of us have endured sexual assault and had our scalps almost ripped off, while doing our job?
posted by thisisdrew at 8:34 AM on May 5, 2014 [1 favorite]

That sounds about right. I'm sure there is a great book waiting to be written on the decline of 60 minutes and CBS news in general.

At some point it seemed they tried to start competing for Fox News' viewers. I was taken aback on the day after the last presidential election when one of the talking heads on the CBS morning show wailed, "But he's a socialist!" I think CBS has joined other TV news media in dropping much of their pretense in adhering to objective journalistic standards. I won't be surprised at all if they bring Lara Logan back.
posted by fuse theorem at 8:37 AM on May 5, 2014

On that same note, I'm not reading the patronizing or sexist tones that have been mentioned above.

I think the author tried to report objectively on sexism in the television news industry, but there were a few times where the line was crossed and it felt like there was some bias shining through. The last paragraph was particularly repugnant:

So Lara Logan may, or may not, return in the fall season. Either way, the show must go on. Waiting in the wings is a new up-and-comer. Attractive, blonde, fluent in three foreign languages. Everybody is talking about 34-year-old Clarissa Ward. “Jeff’s very high on her,” says a 60 Minutes producer.

As if Logan is a completely replaceable blond woman cog in the 60 Minutes machine and not a valued and tenacious reporter. Bringing up Clarissa Ward is unnecessary and churlish.
posted by mokin at 8:43 AM on May 5, 2014 [3 favorites]

How many of us have made big mistakes in jobs?

I move pianos, and I own the company. When I make a mistake, it costs me money. When employees make mistakes, it costs THEM money. The bigger the mistake, the more it costs the person who made it. THAT'S HOW THEY KNOW IT WAS A MISTAKE.
posted by Repack Rider at 8:45 AM on May 5, 2014 [1 favorite]

has joined other TV news media in dropping much of their pretense

It has occurred to me that US television, in general, has become an enormous troll whose sole raison d'être is to keep the population in a constant state of agitation, regardless of the content disseminated, whether that be sports, kitchenaria, reality/fantasy or the reporting of current events, among many others. It's a giant hate machine and whoa be the person or persons who find themselves on the wrong side at any particular time.
posted by jsavimbi at 8:50 AM on May 5, 2014 [5 favorites]

When employees make mistakes, it costs THEM money. The bigger the mistake, the more it costs the person who made it. THAT'S HOW THEY KNOW IT WAS A MISTAKE.

FYI, deducting from an employee's paycheck for breakages is totally fucking illegal in your listed state of California.
posted by Talez at 8:55 AM on May 5, 2014 [39 favorites]

mokin: I think the author tried to report objectively on sexism in the television news industry, but there were a few times where the line was crossed and it felt like there was some bias shining through. The last paragraph was particularly repugnant:
So Lara Logan may, or may not, return in the fall season. Either way, the show must go on. Waiting in the wings is a new up-and-comer. Attractive, blonde, fluent in three foreign languages. Everybody is talking about 34-year-old Clarissa Ward. “Jeff’s very high on her,” says a 60 Minutes producer.
As if Logan is a completely replaceable blond woman cog in the 60 Minutes machine and not a valued and tenacious reporter. Bringing up Clarissa Ward is unnecessary and churlish.

Or, alternatively, it is a way to pointedly mention that CBS may in fact be grooming a replacement, partly on the basis of her looks.

Now, I'm not suggesting for a second that TV news reporters tend to skew towards young, attractive women, while hiring and retaining male reporters without nearly as much concern about looks and age... Wait, yes I am. That's EXACTLY what news shows do. "Attractive, blonde" is 2/3 of what one needs to be a female Fox network "reporter" ("willing to faithfully and invariably repeat conservative talking points being the last third"). Other networks are willing to gamble on brunettes, as well.
posted by IAmBroom at 9:01 AM on May 5, 2014

Talez: "When employees make mistakes, it costs THEM money. The bigger the mistake, the more it costs the person who made it. THAT'S HOW THEY KNOW IT WAS A MISTAKE.

FYI, deducting from an employee's paycheck for breakages is totally fucking illegal in your listed state of California."

I'm thinking he didn't mean it literally. It can cost the employee money in terms of lack of raises, promotion, etc.
posted by Big_B at 9:08 AM on May 5, 2014

Despite this article's emphasis on her supposedly using sex and sex appeal to unfairly get ahead, the fact remains that Logan is an Emmy award-winning journalist who has also won a slew of other journalism awards for high-quality, on-the-ground reporting. But she got conned, hard, and the fact that the story made it to air speaks volumes about both her own personal biases and those of her producer and bosses -- and their willingness to trust her so far as to disregard or ignore proper vetting procedure.

That is why reporters need someone who knows their talents but also their blind spots and guide them away from stories that they be a little too eager to swallow. Don't assign a story where a reporter can be baited -- put them where their thinking and perspective will be an asset rather than a liability.

News is not easy to gather and we can be oblivious to our own filters. It is a shame that someone's hard-earned career can go down in flames that easily when there may not be the right sorts of checks and balances in place...
posted by Alexandra Kitty at 9:28 AM on May 5, 2014

FYI, deducting from an employee's paycheck for breakages is totally fucking illegal in your listed state of California."

Pretty irate for someone who doesn't have a dog in my fight. I have a pool of employees I draw from. The people who get the call are those who don't screw up the opportunity when they get it. People who cost me a lot of money get fired on the spot. Only had to do that once. The reason I make the big bucks is because I pay for all the little mistakes, but that doesn't mean I tolerate them or that there are no consequences for not doing the job right.

Back to Ms. Logan. This was not a "mistake" on her part, and attempts to characterize it as such are a red herring. When someone conspires with others to dupe the public, and gets caught, an explanation is in order for all phases of the deception: origin, transmission, motives and methods. If she is incapable of examining her own "journalistic" role in the deception, perhaps she should look for a job in the field of urban stray-dog control.
posted by Repack Rider at 9:29 AM on May 5, 2014 [4 favorites]

> As if Logan is a completely replaceable blond woman cog in the 60 Minutes machine and not a valued and tenacious reporter. Bringing up Clarissa Ward is unnecessary and churlish.

I think the (silly and arguable) point being made there is that it's CBS being churlish, not the author. He's suggesting that management was keen on Logan for all the wrong reasons, and now she risks being chucked out for all the wrong reasons.

But that's got its own problems. The author spends most of the article implying that Logan was destructively ruthless in her reporting, and that she deserves to pay the price for having gotten burned on the Benghazi story. If that's true, then not bringing her back altogether can easily be defended — Morley Safer is alleged to have demanded that she be fired.

Yet if that ends up happening, if Logan departs the network, the author is telling us it's because she's viewed as a replaceable pretty face, not because of a demonstrated act of incompetence on her part. The article has some value to it, but it's buried underneath this cynical tone in which all the players are wrong, even when they're right.
posted by savetheclocktower at 9:30 AM on May 5, 2014 [2 favorites]

That piece gives too much weight to the office of Standards and Practices. Linda Mason, while a fine journalist, frequently was pressured to let stuff slip by, and even if she had been at CBS during this whole mess, her office wouldn't have been able to stop anything.
posted by Ideefixe at 9:32 AM on May 5, 2014 [2 favorites]

60 Minutes' decline (I agree, it's been going on for awhile but is more pronounced in the past few years) is troubling in a lot of reasons-- on a personal level it's because my parents pretty much accept it as the Gospel as they've been trained to do since they were just out of college and it was legitimately the best news source around. As they've gotten older, the show's tone, pacing, etc. have remained pretty constant but the quality of the reporting has declined which leads to some debates that are basically unwinnable because of 60 Minutes' impact on their views.

On the other hand, Frontline seems to be maintaining its high standards.
posted by cell divide at 9:39 AM on May 5, 2014

It has occurred to me that US television, in general, has become an enormous troll whose sole raison d'être is to keep the population in a constant state of agitation...

And this fact REALLY pisses me off! Seriously, hearing about this makes me SO ANGRY I- uhh...wait a minute...
posted by happyroach at 10:12 AM on May 5, 2014 [2 favorites]

What? No mention of "investigative reporter"/future FoxNews star* Sharyl Attkisson? Now there's a Benghazi nutcase.

*"She is currently at work on a book — tentatively titled “Stonewalled: One Reporter’s Fight for Truth in Obama’s Washington”... which is being published by HarperCollins, a division of NewsCorp (and not by Simon & Schuster, a division of CBS Corp.)."
posted by oneswellfoop at 10:29 AM on May 5, 2014 [1 favorite]

LexisNexis Deletes CBS's Discredited Benghazi Report From Its Archives
posted by nevercalm at 11:27 AM on May 5, 2014 [1 favorite]

...really must have Don Hewitt and Mike Wallace absolutely spinning in their graves.

If Wallace's kid's career doesn't already have him spinning like a dynamo, he can't have been much of a journalist.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 12:08 PM on May 5, 2014 [2 favorites]

60 Minutes has no credibility, so whether they take her back or not will make no difference.
posted by doctor_negative at 12:19 PM on May 5, 2014

" Frontline seems to be maintaining its high standards"
Mainly because Frontline's pieces aren't all produced in-house by staffers eager for ratings and permanent jobs. WGBH presents Frontline, but uses outside production companies (some started by former staff producers) and producers.
posted by Ideefixe at 12:22 PM on May 5, 2014

I think if you look at the state of the TV industry these days, you would be hard pressed to find a single woman broadcaster who isn't much more than a "replaceable pretty face" in the eyes of network management.

It seems the minute a woman actually gets some acclaim in the industry, they bring in someone 15 years younger, as "the weekend host", grooming her to take over the main spot.
posted by timsteil at 12:57 PM on May 5, 2014

LexisNexis Deletes CBS's Discredited Benghazi Report From Its Archives
posted by nevercalm at 11:27 AM on May 5 [+][!]

From the article:
"TPM's requests for comments from CBS and LexisNexis were not immediately returned."

Update: When later asked about the LexisNexis deletion of the discredited CBS Benhazi report, a network executive responded "What discredited Benghazi report?"
posted by Atom Eyes at 1:03 PM on May 5, 2014

The tone of that article is incredibly sexist and patronizing, even if she is a lousy reporter.

Ignoring this, i think the most egregious thing is that it acts like 60 minutes had some sterling, super high-brow rep before all of this. Yea, let's just pretend that there hasn't been several glaring bullshit incidents before this to throw this lady under the bus as some sort of sole aggressor.

ugh.
posted by emptythought at 1:55 PM on May 5, 2014 [2 favorites]

Another glaring bullshit incident, or why Mike Wallace probably isn't spinning so hard in his grave.
posted by dirigibleman at 2:43 PM on May 5, 2014

I was horrified by what happened to Lara Logan in Tarir Square. I was horrified by her Benghazi story for completely different reasons. I don't get the impression that she learned from her mistakes with that story. If that's the case, her credibility is questionable. Credibility is a big deal in journalism. I don't think I'd put her back on the air.
posted by kat518 at 5:18 PM on May 5, 2014 [1 favorite]

I think if you look at the state of the TV industry these days, you would be hard pressed to find a single woman broadcaster who isn't much more than a "replaceable pretty face" in the eyes of network management.

In the L.A. market the same could be said for the men, but at least they aren't required to wear cocktail attire at 6am.
posted by Room 641-A at 5:49 PM on May 5, 2014 [1 favorite]

Don't people call around to see if their interview subjects and sources could have possibly, theoretically, done any of the crap they claim to have done?
posted by Mister_A at 2:30 PM on May 6, 2014

Please Don’t Read This Benghazi Article
posted by homunculus at 9:25 PM on May 7, 2014