While considering different contexts of Watergate, first one must look at the scandal from a historical perspective. A few of the events leading up to the scandal were Vietnam, the leaking of the Pentagon Papers, the psychiatric office burglary, and, lastly, the break-in at the DNC headquarters. Another aspect to consider would be the relationship between the media and Nixon’s administration. The relationship had already suffered due to the large disapproval of our involvement in Vietnam. Immediately following the scandal Americans were fully aware of the government’s hidden agenda.
Secondly, we must look at the impact the scandal brought upon Americans. As more and more Americans started realizing the importance of the press, there was a significant increase in interest within the field. Ultimately, this led to a rise of great journalists. Watergate also drastically altered the way the country viewed the presidency. With the amount of corruption taking place, many became less likely to trust the government at all.
Referring back to the movie, All The President’s Men, one must consider the legal and ethical issues concerning the two renowned Washington Post reporters, Woodward and Bernstein. In my opinion a few things could have been done differently. Knocking on doors and speaking to people in person was a very effective method at the time. However, in a few cases they crossed the line. For example, when Bernstein abruptly marched in for a cigarette at the bookkeeper’s residence. That could have been considered trespassing. Regardless of the legal aspect, it was not ethical.
I believe the tactics the journalists were using to get information may have been at question as well. They tried to trick people into thinking they had already obtained the information from another source. This made it seem as if they were not using them as a source but just confirming a previous one. Ultimately, it does not prove to be ethical under the Code of Ethics.
Woodward and Bernstein also knew people were at risk and there was an apparent threat of safety. This does not align with the “SPJ Code,” more specifically, under the “Do No Harm” category. Furthermore, the bookkeeper proceeds to show how uncomfortable she feels with revealing further information, but Bernstein doesn’t stop there. He keeps insisting on getting more information no matter what the consequences could be. Others may feel as if this was completely ethical, but I may not be so easily convinced.
Overall, the journalists failed to foresee the significance and size of the scandal in the beginning, but it was handled well under the circumstances they were faced with. I must say that it was very brave going against the federal government and pursuing the interest of the public despite the risks. This showed how dedicated Woodward and Bernstein were to finishing the story. After nearly throwing in the towel, Deep Throat guided Woodward in the right direction. Advising Woodward to follow the money led to the unraveling of the scandal. If it wasn’t for a significant source like Deep Throat, Americans may have been left in the dark.
Nicely done!