Breaking: Lara Logan Taking Leave Of Absence From '60 Minutes' After Debunked Benghazi Report
Source: Huffington Post / Talking Points Memo
TOM KLUDT NOVEMBER 26, 2013, 1:44 PM EST659
Weeks after she was forced to retract her "60 Minutes" report on the attack in Benghazi, Libya, Lara Logan and producer Max McClellan will be taking a leave of absence from the CBS News staple.
The Huffington Post's Michael Calderone broke the news. (SEE BELOW)
Logan was forced to admit that the report was a "mistake" after a British security contractor's account of the attack was discredited.
Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/lara-logan-taking-leave-of-absence-from-60-minutes
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/26/lara-logan-60-minutes-leave_n_4344883.html
Michael Calderone
michael.calderone@huffingtonpost.com
CBS News' Lara Logan Taking Leave Of Absence Over Discredited '60 Minutes' Benghazi Report
Posted: 11/26/2013 1:48 pm EST
NEW YORK -- Jeff Fager, chairman of CBS News and executive producer of '"60 Minutes," informed staff Tuesday that Lara Logan and her producer, Max McClellan, would be taking a leave of absence following an internal report on the newsmagazine's discredited Oct. 27 Benghazi report.
Fager's memo and findings of an internal review, both obtained by The Huffington Post, are below.
This story is developing
There is a lot to learn from this mistake for the entire organization. We have rebuilt CBS News in a way that has dramatically improved our reporting abilities. Ironically 60 Minutes, which has been a model for those changes, fell short by broadcasting a now discredited account of an important story, and did not take full advantage of the reporting abilities of CBS News that might have prevented it from happening.
As a result, I have asked Lara Logan, who has distinguished herself and has put herself in harms way many times in the course of covering stories for us, to take a leave of absence, which she has agreed to do. I have asked the same of producer Max McClellan, who also has a distinguished career at CBS News.
As Executive Producer, I am responsible for what gets on the air. I pride myself in catching almost everything, but this deception got through and it shouldnt have.
When faced with a such an error, we must use it as an opportunity to make our broadcast even stronger. We are making adjustments at 60 Minutes to reduce the chances of it happening again.
There is a lot of pride at CBS News. Every broadcast is working hard to live up to the high standard set at CBS News for excellence in reporting. This was a regrettable mistake. But there are many fine professionals at 60 Minutes who produce some of the very best of broadcast journalism, covering the important and interesting stories of our times, and they will continue to do so each and every Sunday.
Jeff Fage
Chairman, CBS News
Executive Producer, 60 Minutes
My review found that the Benghazi story aired by 60 Minutes on October 27 was deficient in several respects:
--From the start, Lara Logan and her producing team were looking for a different angle to the story of the Benghazi attack. They believed they found it in the story of Dylan Davies, written under the pseudonym, Morgan Jones. It purported to be the first western eyewitness account of the attack. But Logans report went to air without 60 Minutes knowing what Davies had told the FBI and the State Department about his own activities and location on the night of the attack.
--The fact that the FBI and the State Department had information that differed from the account Davies gave to 60 Minutes was knowable before the piece aired. But the wider reporting resources of CBS News were not employed in an effort to confirm his account. Its possible that reporters and producers with better access to inside FBI sources could have found out that Davies had given varying and conflicting accounts of his story.
--Members of the 60 Minutes reporting team conducted interviews with Davies and other individuals in his book, including the doctor who received and treated Ambassador Stevens at the Benghazi hospital. They went to Davies employer Blue Mountain, the State Department, the FBI (which had interviewed Davies), and other government agencies to ask about their investigations into the attack. Logan and producer Max McClellan told me they found no reason to doubt Davies account and found no holes in his story. But the team did not sufficiently vet Davies account of his own actions and whereabouts that night.
--Davies told 60 Minutes that he had lied to his own employer that night about his location, telling Blue Mountain that he was staying at his villa, as his superior ordered him to do, but telling 60 Minutes that he then defied that order and went to the compound. This crucial point his admission that he had not told his employer the truth about his own actions should have been a red flag in the editorial vetting process.
--After the story aired, the Washington Post reported the existence of a so-called incident report that had been prepared by Davies for Blue Mountain in which he reportedly said he spent most of the night at his villa, and had not gone to the hospital or the mission compound. Reached by phone, Davies told the 60 Minutes team that he had not written the incident report, disavowed any knowledge of it, and insisted that the account he gave 60 Minutes was word for word what he had told the FBI. Based on that information and the strong conviction expressed by the team about their story, Jeff Fager defended the story and the reporting to the press.
--On November 7, the New York Times informed Fager that the FBIs version of Davies story differed from what he had told 60 Minutes. Within hours, CBS News was able to confirm that in the FBIs account of their interview, Davies was not at the hospital or the mission compound the night of the attack. 60 Minutes announced that a correction would be made, that the broadcast had been misled, and that it was a mistake to include Davies in the story. Later a State Department source also told CBS News that Davies had stayed at his villa that night and had not witnessed the attack.
--Questions have been raised about the recent pictures from the compound which were displayed at the end of the report, including a picture of Ambassador Stevens schedule for the day after the attack. Video taken by the producer-cameraman whom the 60 Minutes team sent to the Benghazi compound last month clearly shows that the pictures of the Technical Operations Center were authentic, including the picture of the schedule in the debris.
--Questions have also been raised about the role of Al Qaeda in the attack since Logan declared in the report that Al Qaeda fighters had carried it out. Al Qaedas role is the subject of much disagreement and debate. While Logan had multiple sources and good reasons to have confidence in them, her assertions that Al Qaeda carried out the attack and controlled the hospital were not adequately attributed in her report.
--In October of 2012, one month before starting work on the Benghazi story, Logan made a speech in which she took a strong public position arguing that the US Government was misrepresenting the threat from Al Qaeda, and urging actions that the US should take in response to the Benghazi attack. From a CBS News Standards perspective, there is a conflict in taking a public position on the governments handling of Benghazi and Al Qaeda, while continuing to report on the story.
--The book, written by Davies and a co-author, was published by Threshold Editions, an imprint of Simon & Schuster, part of the CBS Corporation. 60 Minutes erred in not disclosing that connection in the segment.
Al Ortiz
Executive Director of Standards and Practices
CBS News
after CBS's National Guard controversy, outside panel issued 234-page report. For Benghazi, CBS issues an 11-paragraph summary of review
get the red out
(13,461 posts)But will anyone take notice besides us?
PeoViejo
(2,178 posts)Last edited Tue Nov 26, 2013, 07:18 PM - Edit history (1)
and a good head-start on the Truth. The crazies will chose to ignore the retraction is my guess.
Scairp
(2,749 posts)And I must apologize as you guys were right and I was wrong for defending her. I think that what happened to her in Egypt colored my perceptions of her and I was cutting her more slack than I obviously should have. In my own defence I had no idea she was so right wing and I also heard that speech she gave last year after the piece had been debunked. I also have just learned she has no journalistic education to speak of. Fager should go too. He allowed this to go on air, knowing her much better than the public does. This whole episode is a disgrace. Mike Wallace must be turning in his grave.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)When she was in the middle-east, telling the truth about Bush's folly.
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)Don't know exactly what corrupted her (a number of factors probably).
onehandle
(51,122 posts)I can't imagine how that would affect you.
AZ Mike
(468 posts)Not to jump to conclusions, but this seems like a rather nasty insinuation (e.g., her gang rape experience caused her corruption).
Please clarify.
Sophiegirl
(2,338 posts)As a victim of sexual abuse and rape, I suffer from PTSD. Before getting treatment and extensive therapy, I viewed every situation as suspect. Reading into it a negative, evil purpose. It affected my daily life. Even when unfounded, my mind would conjure up a scenario that was, in essence, a personal attack. Leading to a greater conspirosy that was the furthest from the truth. Feelings of fear and pain are often channeled as anger in a self-protection mode. One goes on offense to protect oneself. Even when it is irrational.
My experiences were 40 years ago. I still struggle with some after effects today. IMHO, she has not had enough time and mental health treatment to help deal with the emotional ramifications of the attack she endured.
This does not condone her report. But might be a reasonable explanation.
7962
(11,841 posts)I hope you are doing better with each day. My cousin was raped at knifepoint, and I know it was very traumatic for her. She seems to have dealt with it and has no visible problems, but we dont discuss it either, so there may be things "below the surface".
Good luck in your healing.
Sophiegirl
(2,338 posts)I'm doing very well these days. But the journey was very tough. Now, I live most days symptom-free.
For a survivor, it is easier to pretend that all is okay rather than face the inner turmoil. There is always "stuff" below the surface. Admitting it is akin to admitting weakness or failure. It's so very hard because of the shame involved.
I hope your cousin is getting help from a good therapist.
7962
(11,841 posts)unless you, with your experience, dont think that would be a good idea. She doesnt seem to be self destructive or anything like that. she's made some bad decisions, but havent we all. She is 53 now, she was in her late 20s when it happened. But I know that time doesnt necessarily heal all wounds, too.
Sophiegirl
(2,338 posts)I would gently ask if she ever thought of going to a therapist. It is a very delicate subject. Even the mention of therapy may appear threatening. It is truly based upon the individual and how resilient they are. If it comes up, then simply ask if she has ever been to a therapist. Leave it at that. If she hasn't, she will (trust me) think about it a bit. She may not do it, but the tiny seed might be planted. It is up to her to let it germinate.
7962
(11,841 posts)cosmicone
(11,014 posts)However, being sexually assaulted (it is not even clear if she was assaulted or just groped - although both are traumatic) doesn't give one a license to do a shoddy job in a chosen occupation. Being a journalist requires objectivity and if the objectivity is lost, she should have taken a leave of absence immediately after the attack.
Would you like to be sentenced to death for shoplifting by a judge who blames it on a sexual assault -- or an operation on you botched by a surgeon who was sexually assaulted leaving you disabled and disfigured?
I do buy the explanation but not as an excuse for what Lara Logan did.
Sophiegirl
(2,338 posts)She should have taken a longer leave of absence. As a survivor, I wanted to show I was perfectly okay. But I wasn't.
I'm not excusing her for the broadcast. I do, however, sympathize with her trauma.
"Suddenly, before I even know what's happening, I feel hands grabbing my breasts, grabbing my crotch, grabbing me from behind," she told Scott Pelley of "60 Minutes."
Things quickly spiraled out of control. "I think my shirt, my sweater was torn off completely," she said. "My shirt was around my neck. I felt the moment that my bra tore. ... And I felt them tear out, they literally just tore my pants to shreds. ... I didn't even know that they were beating me with flagpoles and sticks and things, because I couldn't even feel that. Because I think of the sexual assault, was all I could feel, was their hands raping me over and over and over again. ... They were tearing my body in every direction at this point, tearing my muscles. And they were trying to tear off chunks of my scalp, they had my head in different directions."
Logan flew back to Washington, where she spent four days in a hospital as she was treated for cuts, bruises and internal tearing. She's been recovering at home with her husband and children. "I felt like I had been given a second chance that I didn't deserve," she said of her family. "I came so close to leaving them, to abandoning them." - See more at: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/2011/05/lara-logan-breaks-her-silence-on-60-minutes-.html#sthash.IKFkNXND.dpuf
- See more at: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/2011/05/lara-logan-breaks-her-silence-on-60-minutes-.html#sthash.IKFkNXND.dpuf
deurbano
(2,894 posts)MONDAY, JUN 28, 2010 04:29 AM PDT
The two poles of journalism
Michael Hastings and Lara Logan illustrate the difference between afflicting and serving the powerful
GLENN GREENWALD
<<...Yesterday, Hastings was interviewed on CNNs Reliable Sources about the criticisms he has received from media figures over his article, and that was followed by a segment with CBS Lara Logan, who lambasted him. I really recommend watching these two segments (video below), as they illustrate the two poles of journalism: those who view their role as exposing the relevant secrets of the powerful (Hastings) and those who view their role as protecting those secrets and serving the interests of those officials (Logan). Amazingly, Logan sounds like the most devoted member of McChyrstals P.R. staff or even his family: so furious is she that Hastings would publish an article that reflected negatively on this Fine, Great Man (whom she supposedly covers) so devoted is she to the interests of this military official that, at one point, she drops the neutral journalist mask and shows her Bill Kristol face, and actually spat: Michael Hastings has never served his country the way McChrystal has. ...>>
2banon
(7,321 posts)Thank you again for the time/labor to post this.... likely it should be kept handy, because the lies and speculations based on half truths and incomplete/missing information has a way of forming a life of it's own and so it goes... Lara Logan is and has always been a Neo-Con spokesperson vis a vis journalist gigs.
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)ReRe
(10,597 posts)$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
ctsnowman
(1,903 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)stating explicitly that you have to suck up to them if you are going to get a story.
I think THAT particular interview marked a turning point for me, because up to that point, I thought she was generally okay.
AAO
(3,300 posts)One way or another you are "buying" a story.
QuestForSense
(653 posts)So she was preaching to the choir. But seriously, I think Logan is a contrarian. She used to be against Bush & Co. Now she's against Obama. Contrarians must always be pushing AGAINST. They are incapable of pushing FOR. It's in their nature. Like being a natural-born fault-finder. It's one thing to be anti-authoritarian, but quite another to be contrarian. I'm sure her experience in Egypt had an enormous effect and for that I'm sympathetic. But journalism requires objectivity. So if she's got a contrarian ax to grind she ought to move on. Perhaps to Entertainment Tonight, where she can suck up to celebrities for her stories. Like Charlie Rose.
Lochloosa
(16,062 posts)The should investigate and seek out the truth, then and only then, report on it.
She failed that.
QuestForSense
(653 posts)Last edited Wed Nov 27, 2013, 01:09 AM - Edit history (1)
The only thing a reporter should push FOR is the truth.
hue
(4,949 posts)tblue
(16,350 posts)She's got the look and the mindset, plus some genuine journalist cred, as the cherry on top. She'll be a star on Fox and she'll make oodles, and her credibility will be further debased--though her audience won't care.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)She belongs working at a MacDonalds, not working as a journalist. But Fox is probably her best option.
Kingofalldems
(38,444 posts)She should have been publicly fired though, with a thorough investigation of this whole matter. I smell a right wing conspiracy.
sakabatou
(42,146 posts)Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)Someone else put her up to it and it wasn't her work, she was just the mouthpiece?
bucolic_frolic
(43,121 posts)and out about 6 months later
this may be the same
This should not be allowed to blow over
It's a major crack in a copper-bottom journalistic institution
MADem
(135,425 posts)duffyduff
(3,251 posts)Absolutely NO comparison at all.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)He was kept on as a "contributing editor" for 60 Minutes for the rest of the season, during which time as far as I could tell he wasn't actually allowed to "contribute" anything.
MADem
(135,425 posts)pretty much agreed with him.
I don't think anyone thinks old Dan jumped--he was most definitely pushed. And I swear, if they could have, they would have pushed him off the darn roof so he wouldn't live to tell any tales.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)I'm just saying it's too soon to say Logan won't be getting the same treatment.
MADem
(135,425 posts)LeftOfWest
(482 posts)Why is she still there while Rather was canned.
I asked that in my mail to CBS but doubt they will care or answer, but I am still going to ask.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)took the institution to a new low, and frankly, they should replace her with a real journalist who knows how to ask hard questions of those running our military/industrial complex rather than flattering them, throwing softballs, and being a sycophantic war-cheerleader. K&R
randome
(34,845 posts)The reader of the news should be recognized as only the tip of the iceberg.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]
TeamPooka
(24,217 posts)cosmicone
(11,014 posts)johnfunk
(6,113 posts)this was not voluntary, according to a little birdie I know at a certain TV network.
Plus, it looks to be MUCH worse than CBS is admitting. I have been told that CBS wants answers on the connections between Lara's husband -- who was a Loyal Bushie disinformation officer during the Iraq debacle -- and Mary Matalin -- who is the chief editor at a hard-right imprint at Simon and Schuster who published Dylan "Morgan Jones" Davies' now-discredited book about his "hroics" in an attempt to "defend" the CIA... er, ahem, diplomatic compound in Benghazi against a well-drilled, possibly CIA-trained sectarian militia... excuse me, I mean Al Qaeda evildoers.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)that a LOA - even involuntary - doesn't have.
TexasProgresive
(12,157 posts)KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Goodbye!
alp227
(32,015 posts)Burf-_-
(205 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)She can now spend more time with her family.
Hopefully, a long, LONG time.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)I'm guessing before 6/1/14.
SCVDem
(5,103 posts)rocktivity
(44,573 posts)And let's make it permanent!
rocktivity
grasswire
(50,130 posts).....and nothing here about the CBS executive who came from FOX.
There's more to this story.
Can someone who has posting privileges at Huff Post make sure they have the info about her hubby?
markpkessinger
(8,392 posts). . . Dan Rather was forced out of his job for a report on George Bush's abasence frorm his National Guard service because he based his report on a document that couldn't be authenticated, but the substance of that report was never challenged or even refuted. Logan, on the other hand, gives a report on Benghazi, the SUBSTANCE of which is shown to be false, and she merely takes a leave of absence? Can you say 'double standard?
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)and not originals.
They were NOT debunked, unlike this report here.
Mr.Bill
(24,263 posts)Hilarious and sad at the same time.
Berlum
(7,044 posts)They have probably sent Logan back to Right-wing Republicon Corporate Media Propaganda Indoctrination School.
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,323 posts)Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)She can tell any stories she wants to at Faux Snooze and will never have to worry about credibility, apologizing, or getting the story wrong.
Hell, she won't even have to worry about getting facts.
Just look at Geraldo.
Sophiegirl
(2,338 posts)If she were to be fired, there would be lawsuits aplenty because of what she went through in Egypt. She can use her "on-the-job" attack and subsequent mental health issues as the foundation of a suit and most likely would win based upon the sympathy factor of any jury.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)Sophiegirl
(2,338 posts)It's a theory. Not a justification.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)SDjack
(1,448 posts)Jeff Fager, chairman of CBS News and executive producer of '"60 Minutes" is ultimately responsible for the quality system that failed to catch the problems with the Benghazi story.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)which is why they go after the low hanging fruit first.
pam4water
(2,916 posts)Javaman
(62,510 posts)so she's gone, that still doesn't deal with those in charge who were the real ones behind it.
marble falls
(57,063 posts)Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)Cleita
(75,480 posts)of journalism and should be not given the same status as those who work hard at finding out the true facts of a developing story.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)Before anybody brings up Dan Rather and the Killian memos, those memos were NEVER proven to be "forgeries" but were merely copies, not originals, and therefore they couldn't be absolutely verified as genuine.
Rather's case was purely political, while Logan's is a case of journalistic malpractice.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Boycott CBS.
LiberalFighter
(50,836 posts)CBS had to be hounded before Leslie Stahl step down from the foundation.
LiberalFighter
(50,836 posts)in their right wing cave.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)Once in a while he will do a responsible job, like with the Lance Armstrong deal, but I well remember how he was during the Clinton years. He was "reporting" everything he was spoonfed by Kenneth Starr.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Logan gets a leave of absence for participating in a fraud with no foundation. Seems fair to me. Fired is the same as leave of absence. Victim of scam is the same as perpetrator of scam. Substantially accurate is the same as total bullshit.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)and not originals.
They have NEVER been debunked despite all of the right-wing horseshit trying to cast doubt on them with their bogus "analysis" by a lawyer who didn't know his ass from a hole in the ground about typewriters.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)And that is a fact.
The media is clear gone.
dawn frenzy adams
(429 posts)Don't come back now, you hear?
Auntie Bush
(17,528 posts)Now they have ObamaCare to criticize. They have been non-stop critical of Obama for 5 straight years. I guess it will end up being 8 years. How can a President be wrong on EVERYTHING for 6 years? I can't think of one thing that has been met with ReThug approval.
YOHABLO
(7,358 posts)This woman should have been fired. Period. The end. Done. I am sure FOX will welcome her with open arms. Now I need to take my medicine called Fukitol.
yellowcanine
(35,698 posts)--In October of 2012, one month before starting work on the Benghazi story, Logan made a speech in which she took a strong public position arguing that the US Government was misrepresenting the threat from Al Qaeda, and urging actions that the US should take in response to the Benghazi attack. From a CBS News Standards perspective, there is a conflict in taking a public position on the governments handling of Benghazi and Al Qaeda, while continuing to report on the story.
Logan had a clear conflict of interest and yet she reported this story as a supposedly neutral reporter. She was anything but and it obviously influenced how she reported the story and why she relied on an uncorroborated and self serving source in Davies - his account fed into her bias. Others found this immediately. Why did it take CBS so long to find it or appreciate its significance? A reporter who will do this cannot be trusted. Note that Logan still has not been fired - she is on a loa. Not the same thing at all.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,168 posts)She sounds like a full fledged Fox News Benghazigate stoker. One of those that can be convinced that this one attack was somehow uniquely different than the 13 attacks on embassies and consulate compounds under George W. That somehow this special case was preventable while those others under Bush were just unavoidable tragedies.
I'm so disappointed in her. I've seen her on stories before the Iraq embedded gig, where she seemed truly professional. It seemed like Iraq is where she started to change. That's where she met her wing-nut propagandist husband and also started to go gaga over military brass. Of course my heart went out to her after her terrible experience in Egypt and I was hoping she would have the strength to come back to her profession one day. She has failed miserably and its really quite sad. But once, it seems, that a high profile reporter/pundit/celebrity goes to "crazy town" as Jon Stewart would say, they never come back. They go to Fox News. I would bet on her showing up at their door in the near future.
yellowcanine
(35,698 posts)When an ambassador forgets what country he represents and gets more vested in the interests of the host country. Logan did that with the military in Iraq. If she leaves CBS, for sure Fox will hire her. She is just the kind of reporter they want.
JEFF9K
(1,935 posts)TheDonkey
(8,911 posts)CBS should be ashamed of such sloppy reporting. End the show now and hold on to a sliver of respectability but alas ultimately Viacom is only interested in ratings.
gopiscrap
(23,733 posts)Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)Like her propagandist husband.
doc03
(35,324 posts)heart's content and get away with it.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)She should be fired.
markpkessinger
(8,392 posts)2banon
(7,321 posts)share-able?
markpkessinger
(8,392 posts)Thanks!
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)ffr
(22,668 posts)One or two bad apples and the baby gets tossed out with the bathwater. She definitely needs to move on. She stains the 60 minutes brand. It's almost as though she were planted there by Murdock to discredit them. The plan's working.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)why talk about the mistakes that you want to make.
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Response to Post removed (Reply #103)
Hissyspit This message was self-deleted by its author.