Honestly this one is tough to call. It really seems to me like Dan Rather is saying he saw JFKs head get blown forward by the last of three shots on that day. The Zapruder film clearly shows his head getting blasted back by a shot to the head, though he slumps forward after his head's violent snap backwards.
Rather says JFK is holding his fingers to the side of his head prior to the shot that hits him in the throat. If you check the video you'll see JFK waving, his hands are up, but is he clearly holding his hand to his head? I'm not sure it's an accurate description.
Check these two videos out, it'll take just 4 minutes. Then decide what's up with Dan Rather's odd recollection. If you believe he's made some very noticeable mistakes then the question becomes "why?" And there are a lot of sinister possibilities. He could have seen it and lied. He could have not seen it and made something up--but who provides the script and why?. He could have seen it but his recall is horrible and he's terrible at description? Did the CIA, whom Kennedy was going to shut down, lean on Rather somehow? Was he cooperative? Was he threatened? It's long been known the CIA has a very close relationship with the news media. Looks like more research is in order.
Below, former CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather describing the film he saw--which I assume is the Zapruder film. If it isn't, we still have to wonder about the discrepancies.
Next, the Zapruder film.
Think about it.
Because the "fake news" of yesteryear wasn't anything like the high tech, super-powered, exceptionally well-funded machine of today. The manufacture of consent isn't just about self-censorship and ideological conformity in the newsroom, it's the manufacture of the viewers themselves. Social media breaks information consumption habits down to the point that people's attention spans practically disappear. And yeah, fuck science! Thinking critically takes time and effort. How is a population going to be media literate if they can't focus for longer than five seconds?