Who at Viacom wants this?

Okay, I'm going to continue my tin foil hat riff I started a few months back and ask just what the hell is going on over at Viacom?

Since the whole world by now knows about CBS's 60 Minutes II Bush TexANG fiasco I waste too much time covering well tread ground. (If you have been living under a rock over the last week go visit AllahPundit, PowerlineBlog, INDCJournal and RatherBiased for all the info you'll need). What I do find completely perplexing is just why CBS/Viacom has allowed Rather/CBS News to get this far without getting involved. Regardless of what whether or not Viacom brass think Dan Rather has the goods or not, its pretty apparent that the world at large have lost faith in CBS's version of the story.

Now, Viacom is a publicly traded company, and CBS contributes a large wad of cash towards Viacom's bottom line. Journalistic integrity is something that takes a long time to build up, but only one real screw-up to greatly damage, if not destroy. And a news business is built on just that integrity. Without a certain level of trust people aren't going to want to watch your product, and the fewer eyeballs watching your product, the less you can sell your advertising time for. Even if Viacom was full of Bush-hating, Kerry-loving partisans simple economics dictate that they nip this credibility problem in the bud as soon as possible. If the consensus at Viacom is that they had the wrong end of the stick, then they get their mea culpas out and stop digging the hole they've found themselves in ASAP. If, on the other hand, the Viacom brass believes 60 Minutes II's evidence is rock solid they still have to win back a skeptical public which means they gather independent experts and allow an investigation that is open and public. The problem is Viacom have apparently decided to go down the worst path they could go down, namely stubbornly insist they are correct, but continue to obscure the process and evidence they used to come to their conclusion. This will do nothing but continue to erode the public's confidence in their objectivity, which will have a demonstrable effect on their bottom line.

So, the $64,000 question is: why exactly is Viacom allowing CBS News to continue to self distruct? Some folks in the blogosphere think that the memos originated from either the DNC or the Kerry campaign and Rather/CBS News is digging in to protect Kerry's presidential bid from the blow-back this revelation would cause. I have my doubts about this, at least the idea that its Rather/CBS News is behind the strategy simply because of the economic argument I discussed above. Rather, et al may not have a problem mortgaging their reputations to keep a dog in this fight, but the bean counters above them most certainly would. And although news departments traditionally are kept at arms length from the "money" side of things (in order to enhance the appearance that they are as independent from even the appearance of outside influence as possbile) you would expect once the damage really started to pile up Viacom brass would swoop in and, behind closed doors, lay some wood down and let Rather and Co know what's what. After all, at a point its cold hard cash that's on the line and they have a feudatory duty to Viacom shareholders.

So, if CBS is to continue this line of attack it is only because someone very high up at Viacom is allowing it to. As I mentioned before I've written about the appearance of partisanship at Viacom's Infinity Radio division and AllahPundit is reporting that CBS's support comes from way up high. So who at Viacom is willing to bet the livelihood of the company on John Kerry? Redstone? Moonves? Whoever it is, its one hell of a bet to make, and one it looks likely they'll lose. The question is at what cost.