All The President’s Men Midterm
All the President’s Men covers Woodward and Bernstein’s stories on the Watergate scandal in the Washington Post, showing the process behind the reporter’s investigation. Their stories were a landmark for investigative journalism.
The Paul Williams way of reporting consists of 11 steps, but the Investigative Reporter’s Handbook covers three of the main ones: conception, feasibility and assessment. The conception step of the process is seen as Woodward developed the beginning of the Watergate story by asking questions. At the court case, Woodward saw weird moments and confusing information that led to more and more questions involving the CIA and different lawyers, further developing the story.
Multiple Primary and secondary sources were used in the Watergate story, such as police records, people such as Deep Throat, Library records, financial records, phone records and phone books. Each of these sources assisted the investigation by connecting people to each other. Financial records connected payments to leaders, and phone records showed who was in contact with each other.
Woodward and Bernstein used people trails more than any other source. Whistleblowers are the “bread and butter” of the reporter’s case discussing the Watergate scandal, and those who were willing to give information normally just gave bits and pieces of the story.
Ethical dilemmas are common in journalism, because they involve other peoples stories, conflict, or the government. An example of an ethical dilemma is where Bernstein lied to get a receptionist to get into an Mr. Dardist’s office to get phone and finance records for Barker, discovering his payment to Dahlberg. Unnamed sources would have more validity if the reporters could use their identities, but they kept them hidden because they tried to be ethical and trustworthy.
Woodward and Bernstein worked together well because Woodward was excellent with research and Bernstein was a fantastic writer. They were held accountable for their research by their editor, because he would not allow them to public their stories without enough reputable proof. Others in the newsroom gave stories, helped call resources, and wrote down notes for the story.
The reporters investigated the executive branch by asking people involved within the branch. They were tactful and careful when it came to asking questions, and did their best to be as factual as possible. They proved everything they could with documentation and records held within the executive branch itself.
The Watergate scandal is historically important because the investigation highlighted accountability in the White House and the privacy rights of everyone involved. The story was important to investigative journalism because it held the government, FBI, and CIA accountable. It was a landmark for investigative journalism because it showed how far journalists could go to uncover truth.
The reporters and the Washington Post faced many issues, because as they gave the public information about Watergate, they were called liars and told that they were trying to attack the American government. Watergate was mostly researched by the use of people trails and whistleblowers, as the reporters used meetings and phone calls to find information about their story.
Today, the research process would be completely different, as the rise of the internet and social media trails would provide quicker results when looking into specific people. Woodward and Bernstein used personal stories, phone records, financial documents, police records and information from other newspapers to prove their stories.
A story by Woodward and Bernstein entitled Bug Suspect Got Campaign Funds used sources such as a cashier’s check and quotes from Dahlberg and MacGregor. Many times in the story, they mentioned that someone could not be reached for comment, which could distract people from the story. The financial information was vitally important, however, as it proved ties within those in the story to Watergate.
The relationship between the reporter and the editor is protective and accountable. Reporters can get caught up in their stories, or be emotionally involved. Editors provide accountability by only posting stories that are factually true and have enough proof. Editors need to trust their reporters since the reporters are the ones collecting information, and reporters need to trust their editors opinion on what to release to the public.
All the President’s Men taught me how intricate the investigative reporting process can become. Investigating a story as deeply secretive as Watergate is almost impossible, if not for the people that Woodward and Bernstein talked to. The movie showed me how important people’s trails are, and how vital small bits of information that they give are.
The movie also taught me the importance of asking questions. Woodward and Bernstein stumbled upon Watergate, and most of the things they learned came from talking to people in different positions, from librarians to top suspects in the case.
Woodward and Bernstein were both vital characters in “All the President’s Men”, as were DeepThroat, Rosenfeld and Simons. DeepThroat was critically important for the reporters to verify information, and in the end he gave up the final pieces of the story. Rosenfeld and Simons led to the paper being able to post the story.
I, personally, would love to ask the reporters how they kept going with the story. It hit many dead-ends and issues, and I can’t imagine how difficult it had to be to see your work go unnoticed. For investigative journalists around America now, we are in debt to the men that shifted investigative journalism with this story.
On my honor, I have watched “All the President’s Men” in its entirety.
Word Count- 888 Words