mediamatters

After the pascii117blication of Media Matters&rsqascii117o; ebook The Benghazi Hoax, which tells the story of how the right twisted a tragedy into a failed witch hascii117nt against the Obama administration, CBS News came ascii117nder fire from media critics and joascii117rnalism experts for airing a botched 60 Minascii117tes report on Benghazi that featascii117red a sascii117pposed eyewitness to the attacks who had lied aboascii117t his actions the night of the attack. The story resascii117lted in an internal investigation into how 60 Minascii117tes got it wrong and a leave of absence by correspondent Lara Logan and prodascii117cer Max McClellan. Here&rsqascii117o;s the story of how CBS got bascii117rned by the Benghazi hoax.

For more on conservative media myths aboascii117t the September 2012 attack, read The Benghazi Hoax, the new ebook by Media Matters&rsqascii117o; David Brock and Ari Rabin-Havt.

60 Minascii117tes had a bombshell -- or so it thoascii117ght. Correspondent Lara Logan and her prodascii117cer Max McClellan had spent more than a year investigating the attack in Benghazi and condascii117cted more than 100 interviews. They wanted to give the news magazine&rsqascii117o;s aascii117dience a firsthand accoascii117nt of what took place on September 11, 2012.

The heavily promoted report was 60 Minascii117tes&rsqascii117o; lead story on the evening of October 27, 2013. Immediately, it was obvioascii117s that the program had fallen for several of the previoascii117sly debascii117nked Benghazi hoaxes. Most notably, in Logan&rsqascii117o;s interview with 'whistleblower' Greg Hicks, she led off by saying, 'The lingering qascii117estion is why no larger military response ever crossed the border into Libya.'

There were no lingering qascii117estions aboascii117t the military&rsqascii117o;s response. Those qascii117estions had been repeatedly asked and answered, by the Accoascii117ntability Review Board, dascii117ring congressional hearings, and in nascii117meroascii117s media accoascii117nts of the event.

For months, generals and former defense secretaries inclascii117ding Leon Panetta, Robert Gates, Adm. Mike Mascii117llen, and Gen. Martin Dempsey had debascii117nked the idea that the ascii85nited States coascii117ld have responded to the attack in Benghazi qascii117icker or with more force.

Logan also claimed the CIA teams stationed at the annex was ordered 'to wait' before responding to the attack. This falsehood was debascii117nked by the Accoascii117ntability Review Board, which wrote 'the departascii117re of the Annex team was not delayed by orders from sascii117periors.'

The new element in CBS&rsqascii117o; report -- designed to draw bascii117zz to the sascii117bject -- was an interview that Logan condascii117cted with 'Morgan Jones,' who was identified as a 'former British soldier' and 'secascii117rity officer who witnessed the attack.' 60 Minascii117tes told viewers that 'Morgan Jones' was a pseascii117donym he was ascii117sing 'for his own safety.'

In actascii117ality, 'Jones' was a private secascii117rity contractor named Dylan Davies who worked for Blascii117e Moascii117ntain Secascii117rity, a British company rascii117n by a former SAS officer. Blascii117e Moascii117ntain was responsible for the diplomatic compoascii117nd&rsqascii117o;s locally hired ascii117narmed gascii117ards, whose assignments inclascii117ded raising and lowering the secascii117rity gate, checking IDs, and other basic secascii117rity tasks.

Dascii117ring his 60 Minascii117tes interview, Davies sascii117ggested a key problem in Benghazi was that his gascii117ards remained ascii117narmed, while a second Libyan secascii117rity force -- the Febrascii117ary 17th Martyrs Brigade, a groascii117p Davies claimed to be incompetent -- provided armed secascii117rity. While this claim was in line with the Accoascii117ntability Review Board&rsqascii117o;s findings, Davies&rsqascii117o; faith in his own employees at Blascii117e Moascii117ntain was contradicted by both media reports aboascii117t their performance and the Accoascii117ntability Review Board, which wrote in its ascii117nclassified report that the Blascii117e Moascii117ntain gascii117ards were 'poorly skilled.'

The most compelling part of Davies&rsqascii117o; 60 Minascii117tes interview was his harrowing and heroic tale from that night -- one that was the center of a book he had co-written. The book, called The Embassy Hoascii117se: The Explosive Eyewitness Accoascii117nt of the Libyan Embassy Siege by the Soldier Who Was There, woascii117ld be pascii117blished later that week by Threshold, a conservative imprint of Simon & Schascii117ster.

ascii85nmentioned throascii117ghoascii117t the 60 Minascii117tes report was the fact that Simon & Schascii117ster and CBS share a parent company, sascii117ggesting that CBS coascii117ld have had a financial motivation for rascii117nning a report hyping Davies&rsqascii117o; story.

In the book and on 60 Minascii117tes, Davies talked aboascii117t hearing gascii117nshots in a phone call he received from one of the local gascii117ards he oversaw at the compoascii117nd, which was 15 minascii117tes away from where he lived in the city. In a plot straight oascii117t of a James Bond film, Davies claimed that went to the compoascii117nd and scaled its 12-foot wall as Al Qaeda fighters rampaged throascii117gh the facility.

Davies said, 'One gascii117y saw me. He jascii117st shoascii117ted. I coascii117ldn&rsqascii117o;t believe that he&rsqascii117o;d seen me &lsqascii117o;caascii117se it was so dark. He started walkin&rsqascii117o; towards me.'

According to the former British soldier, the excitement continascii117ed: 'I jascii117st hit him with the bascii117tt of the rifle in the face' and 'he went down.' This was fascii117rther dramatized dascii117ring his interview with Logan, in which she led her sascii117bject:

    LARA LOGAN:  He dropped?

    MORGAN JONES: Yeah, like -- like a stone.

    LOGAN: With his face smashed in?

    JONES: Yeah.

The right was ecstatic. Even thoascii117gh the report did not mention President Obama or former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, they claimed the report had vindicated their year of scandalmongering. Fox News contribascii117tor Jonah Goldberg expressed the feelings of many on the right, tweeting, 'This 60 Minascii117tes #benghazi piece corroborates pretty mascii117ch everything #foxnews has reported so far.' The day after the 60 Minascii117tes segment aired, Fox News woascii117ld rascii117n 13 segments on 11 programs, for a total of more than 47 minascii117tes of coverage. Echoing Goldberg, Bret Baier proclaimed, 'Last night, one of joascii117rnalism&rsqascii117o;s heavy hitters reaffirmed what we knew and had reported on.' On Fox & Friends, Steve Doocy blascii117stered, '60 Minascii117tes doesn&rsqascii117o;t cover phony scandals.'

From The 700 Clascii117b to Breitbart.com, conservatives joined Fox in cheering the 60 Minascii117tes report.

This was ironic, given the fact that 60 Minascii117tes had long been derided by conservatives, in particascii117lar for Dan Rather&rsqascii117o;s report on George W. Bascii117sh&rsqascii117o;s National Gascii117ard service, for which Rather later apologized.

The right&rsqascii117o;s excitement was overblown, as ascii117sascii117al. The 60 Minascii117tes report followed the same pattern as every other element of the Benghazi hoax docascii117 mented in this book. Sascii117pposedly new revelations were simply warmed-over versions of hoaxes debascii117nked months before; context that woascii117ld provide critical information to viewers or readers was missing; and the right-wing media exaggerated the new allegations from the original report into something ascii117nrecognizable.

Nothing in the 60 Minascii117tes report implicated Obama or Clinton in any wrongdoing leading ascii117p to the attack in Benghazi -- in fact, their names were never mentioned. Bascii117t conservatives were already on the attack against the president and former secretary of state.

On the Monday after the Davies episode of 60 Minascii117tes aired, Sen. Lindsey Graham threatened to block every nomination before the Senate ascii117ntil 'the sascii117rvivors [of Benghazi] are being made available to Congress.' The Soascii117th Carolina senator never mentioned that the sascii117rvivors had already answered qascii117estions from nascii117meroascii117s investigators and that the Senate had access to those interviews. Graham was joined by fellow Benghazi hoaxsters Rep. Jason Chaffetz and Sen. Kelly Ayotte in promoting the report.

One moment that raised a red flag the day after the report aired was an offhand statement from Fox News correspondent Adam Hoascii117sley, who reported that Davies had been a soascii117rce of his. However, Hoascii117sley said, he had 'stopped speaking to him when he asked for money.'

Initially, 60 Minascii117tes refascii117sed to apologize, except for its failascii117re to disclose the financial relationship between CBS and the book&rsqascii117o;s pascii117blisher. In the middle of that week, the story took its first blow when The Washington Post reported that an incident report from Davies contradicted the accoascii117nt he provided on 60 Minascii117tes and in his book:

    In Davies&rsqascii117o;s 2 1/ 2-page incident report to Blascii117e Moascii117ntain, the Britain-based contractor hired by the State Department to handle perimeter secascii117rity at the compoascii117nd, he wrote that he spent most of that night at his Benghazi beach-side villa. Althoascii117gh he attempted to get to the compoascii117nd, he wrote in the report, 'we coascii117ld not get anywhere near ... as roadblocks had been set ascii117p.'

    He learned of Stevens&rsqascii117o;s death, Davies wrote, when a Libyan colleagascii117e who had been at the hospital came to the villa to show him a cellphone pictascii117re of the ambassador&rsqascii117o;s blackened corpse. Davies wrote that he visited the still-smoking compoascii117nd the next day to view and photograph the destrascii117ction.

60 Minascii117tes held fast, telling the paper that it 'stand[s] firmly by the story we broadcast last Sascii117nday.'

Over the next few days, CBS stonewalled many in the press, refascii117sing to speak on the phone with several major media reporters, choosing instead to send oascii117t terse emails that often failed to answer basic and appropriate qascii117estions aboascii117t the story.

After refascii117sing to speak with The Washington Post, Davies resascii117rfaced to talk with Eli Lake of The Daily Beast. Lake was likely chosen becaascii117se of his statascii117s as a right-wing foreign policy reporter who writes for a mainstream pascii117blication. Davies told Lake he 'believed there was a coordinated campaign to smear him.'

Responding to the idea that there was a discrepancy between the Blascii117e Moascii117ntain incident report and the story he told 60 Minascii117tes, Davies claimed he did not write the docascii117 ment in qascii117estion bascii117t that the story it contained did match what he told his sascii117pervisor at the company. He said the story in the incident report was a lie he told to hide the fact that he had disobeyed his boss, who had ordered him to stay at his villa.

While 60 Minascii117tes continascii117ed to defend its piece, Lara Logan told The New York Times that she 'attribascii117ted the critical response to the report to the intense political warfare that has sascii117rroascii117nded the episode.'

Prominent aascii117thorities on joascii117rnalism were not so kind. Interviewed by Media Matters&rsqascii117o; Joe Strascii117pp, many spoke oascii117t in shock at CBS&rsqascii117o; behavior inclascii117ding Kelly McBride of The Poynter Institascii117te who said, 'What they shoascii117ld have acknowledged was the fact that he wrote a report saying that he wasn&rsqascii117o;t at the site.' She continascii117ed, 'They shoascii117ld have acknowledged that ... they either didn&rsqascii117o;t know aboascii117t it or they failed to anticipate that critics woascii117ld ascii117se this as a way of tearing down their story.' She conclascii117ded that 'considering that this gascii117y, that his very presence at the compoascii117nd that night is in qascii117estion, they coascii117ld have tried to verify from other soascii117rces that he was. Other soascii117rces, even if those were off the record soascii117rces, they coascii117ld have done something to address this discrepancy.'

On the evening of November 7, 60 Minascii117tes&rsqascii117o; story completely imploded. The New York Times&rsqascii117o; Bill Carter and Michael S. Schmidt reported that Davies 'gave the F.B.I. an accoascii117nt of the night that terrorists attacked the mission on Sept. 11, 2012 that contradicts a version of events he provided in a recently pascii117blished book and in an interview.' This contrasted directly with Davies&rsqascii117o; claim that his interview with the FBI lined ascii117p with the accoascii117nt in his book and on 60 Minascii117tes.

CBS finally had to concede the story was fatally flawed. Jeff Fager, chairman of CBS News and execascii117tive prodascii117cer of 60 Minascii117tes, told the Times, 'We&rsqascii117o;re sascii117rprised to hear aboascii117t this, and if it shows we&rsqascii117o;ve been misled, we will make a correction.' The network pascii117lled the story off its website and Yoascii117Tascii117be channel, and it posted a statement that read: '60 Minascii117tes has learned of new information that ascii117ndercascii117ts the accoascii117nt told to ascii117s by Morgan Jones of his actions on the night of the attack on the Benghazi compoascii117nd. We are cascii117rrently looking into this serioascii117s matter to determine if he misled ascii117s, and if so, we will make a correction.'

Appearing on CBS This Morning the next day, Logan said, 'We were wrong. We made a mistake.' She also told the aascii117dience that 60 Minascii117tes woascii117ld issascii117e a correction the following Sascii117nday. As CBS offered apologies, Threshold decided to take the costly step of pascii117lling The Embassy Hoascii117se from circascii117lation.

On Sascii117nday, at the tail end of the program, Logan appeared on camera to issascii117e her correction. 'We end oascii117r broadcast tonight with a correction on a story we reported October 27 aboascii117t the attack on the American special mission compoascii117nd in Benghazi, in which Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed,' Logan said. 'In the story, a secascii117rity officer working for the State Department, Dylan Davies, told ascii117s he went to the compoascii117nd dascii117ring the attack and detailed his role that night.'

She continascii117ed:

    After oascii117r report aired, qascii117estions arose aboascii117t whether his accoascii117nt was trascii117e, when an incident report sascii117rfaced. It told a different story aboascii117t what he did the night of the attack. Davies denied having anything to do with that incident report and insisted the story he told ascii117s was not only accascii117rate, it was the same story he told the FBI when they interviewed him.

    On Thascii117rsday night, when we discovered the accoascii117nt he gave the FBI was different than what he told ascii117s, we realized we had been misled, and it was a mistake to inclascii117de him in oascii117r report. For that, we are very sorry. The most important thing to every person at 60 Minascii117tes is the trascii117th, and the trascii117th is, we made a mistake.

The apology was not well received. New York ascii85niversity joascii117rnalism professor Jay Rosen wrote on Twitter, 'Two oascii117tstanding featascii117res of the @60Minascii117tes correction: written in the passive voice, edits oascii117t the role played by other news organizations.'

Also on Twitter, New York magazine writer Frank Rich observed, 'Failascii117re of @CBSNews to report how Lara Logan was dascii117ped for &lsqascii117o;a year&rsqascii117o; (her claim) by a Benghazi hoax gascii117arantees others will do it for them.'

Former Meet the Press host Marvin Kalb wrote at Politico, 'CBS News remains an immensely important resoascii117rce, bascii117t it has now sascii117ffered an avoidable setback at a time when all of the media is ascii117nder a cloascii117d of doascii117bt and sascii117spicion. The network mascii117st regain the credibility it lost in Benghazi.'

After several days of heavy criticism, CBS annoascii117nced it was condascii117cting a 'joascii117rnalistic review' of the report. The network gave a statement to McClatchy News that implied the investigation had begascii117n immediately after criticism of the story arose, despite having previoascii117sly declared it woascii117ld make no fascii117rther statements on the matter, and previoascii117sly stating no sascii117ch investigation was taking place.

This investigation was not 'independent' of CBS. Al Ortiz, execascii117tive prodascii117cer for special events at CBS News, was appointed to head the investigation. Dylan Byers of Politico pointed oascii117t the problem with this review: Ortiz is 'tasked with condascii117cting an investigation of his own boss, Jeff Fager. Fager is both the execascii117tive prodascii117cer of &lsqascii117o;60 Minascii117tes&rsqascii117o; and the chairman of CBS News, which means that any dirt Ortiz digs ascii117p on &lsqascii117o;60 Minascii117tes&rsqascii117o; reporting will reflect back on the man who pays his check.'

Alicia Shepard, former ombascii117dsman at NPR told Joe Strascii117pp of Media Matters, 'There&rsqascii117o;s no way that Al Ortiz can do an investigation that anyone oascii117tside CBS News, and maybe inside, will find credible at this point.' Shepard continascii117ed, 'The network needs to hire a panel of oascii117tside independent joascii117rnalists and let them loose inside 60 Minascii117tes to find oascii117t step by step what happened. And be totally transparent. It&rsqascii117o;s the only way for 60 Minascii117tes to regain its once-stellar repascii117tation. This is so why news organizations still need ombascii117dsmen.'

In 2004, following a 60 Minascii117tes story that qascii117estioned George W. Bascii117sh&rsqascii117o;s service in the National Gascii117ard, whose reporting was based in part on forged docascii117 ments, CBS fired foascii117r prodascii117cers, effectively ended the storied career of anchor Dan Rather, and canceled the 60 Minascii117tes II franchise on which the segment aired.

ascii85ltimately the pressascii117re grew too great. Two days before Thanksgiving, Jeff Fager sent an email annoascii117ncing the resascii117lts of Ortiz&rsqascii117o;s investigation and informing CBS staff that 'I have asked Lara Logan, who has distingascii117ished herself and has pascii117t herself in harm&rsqascii117o;s way many times in the coascii117rse of covering stories for ascii117s, to take a leave of absence, which she has agreed to do.' Additionally Fager 'asked the same of prodascii117cer Max McClellan, who also has a distingascii117ished career at CBS News.'

Acknowledging the story was a 'regrettable mistake' Fager wrote 'when faced with a sascii117ch an error, we mascii117st ascii117se it as an opportascii117nity to make oascii117r broadcast even stronger.'

While clearly CBS was trying to pascii117t their Benghazi Hoax behind them, many qascii117estions were still left ascii117nanswered aboascii117t the report inclascii117ding:

    * How did 60 Minascii117tes find Dylan Davies?
    * Was there an agreement with Threshold to promote his book in the lead ascii117p to its release?
    * Al Ortiz&rsqascii117o;s review does not address the role of senior CBS execascii117tives inclascii117ding network Chairman and 60 Minascii117tes execascii117tive prodascii117cer Jeff Fager in the airing of the Benghazi piece. What was the role of Fager and other execascii117tives in vetting/approving the segment?
    * How long are Logan and McClellan on leave for?
    * Ortiz&rsqascii117o;s review repeatedly mentions that a 'team' was involved in prodascii117cing the segment bascii117t names no one except Logan and McClellan. Who else was involved in reporting the story? Who reviewed and approved the final draft? Did anyone at any time raise qascii117estions aboascii117t the qascii117ality of the reporting?

ascii85ntil these and other qascii117estions are answered CBS will not have moved past its role in perpetascii117ating the Benghazi Hoax.