Friday, September 10, 2004

Fonts of Information

Via Talking Points Memo, along with discussion about a piece expressing authenticity doubts in the Washington Post, a NYT piece in which the memos' purported author's son expresses doubts that his father had authored all of the documents in question.

I wonder, however, who's the twit - if in fact these are fakes - who thought no one would notice the Times New Roman-ness of the effort. Or, perhaps, more to the point, who's the twit at CBS who thought "hell, looks good to me," if, in fact, they weren't subjected to a thorough vetting.

It's interesting to note that at least one of the CBS rebuttals focuses on their assertion that the content of the memos accurately reflects the mood and opinions of the players described therein.

Hey folks, if you haven't been paying attention - this election hasn't been about content in a long time - if ever. It's been about procedure and perception since . . . well, when hasn't it?

Bush seldom rebuts the charges against him, but he's really good at pointing out the chinks in the chargers. So now - if they are fakes, the President will be all the stronger for someone's misplaced efforts to take him down a few pegs. Unfortunately, that which does not kill his candidacy, only makes him stronger.

I'd expect this gets resolved by tomorrow. A nation of CSI and Law & Order watchers totally dig this stuff. Plus unlike the actual important questions like "Where are the WMD?" and "Where's Osama?" and "How am I going to find a job," Bush et al can focus on solving a tiny mystery of insignificant proportions. All while turning the light away from his nasty little, string pulling, favor cashing family.

Too bad. If it is a forgery, it's likely someone knew all of this went on and figured a hard record would lead to less they said/they said Swift-Boat-ian arguing. Shoulda tried to find a typewriter. They still do exist, you know.

Or they are real. But even if they are - no one will ever really think so without adding their own asterisk. (A method of historical preservation that, by the way, seems to be gaining favor lately.)

[Ed's note: The Phoblographer* asterisk doesn't denote an effort to rewrite history as it unfolds. But it does partially aim to remind you to think about the untold, overlooked, underappreciated sides of stories. The shorthand name for which is "truth."]

No comments: