When it comes to ethical issues in journalism and the media, All The President’s Men (1976), represents exactly the dilemma of what is understood to be ethically correct and wrong, and how perceptions are made from such issues. Ethics is defined as an analysis, evaluation and promotion of correct conduct and or good character, according to the best available standard (Lecture 4.1). The movie in entirety is about President Nixon’s Watergate Scandal, where he sanctioned “dirty tricks” while in office. He approved events and gave permission on things such as bugging the offices of political opponents, sanctioning fake letters, using stolen documents, and hiring spies, raising a major ethical debate on right verses wrong. Likewise, Deep Throat, a member of Nixon’s presidential office, was secretly feeding Bob Woodward of The Washington Post the information he needed to report the scandal to the nation. Right here we see an ethical issue of debate, as the information could be correct or incorrect, and because the source was “anonymous”, it may not be credible. Ethically, was Deep Throat trying to provide information to the press about a President committing a conspiracy? Unethically, secretly meeting with Woodward in a parking garage, feeding him bits and pieces of the Presidents wrongdoings behind his back?
Furthermore, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein were forced to make ethical decisions as journalists. Seeking the truth and reporting it, minimizing harm, acting independently, and being accountable, outline the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) code of ethics, raising debate on how well Woodward and Bernstein followed this outline (Lecture 4.2). When Woodward and Bernstein tried to seek the truth, they used sources that wanted to remain anonymous and were very persistent when it came to these sources not wanting to talk. Was it ethically correct to go to their homes and ask the questions they did in the manner they did just for a lead? When they began reporting the story, the realization of how big the story could actually be did not sink in until they began situating potential sources in danger of losing jobs, or being followed, etc. When they showed up at these homes, they insisted on talking to the potential source, no matter if they said they felt endangered, or did not want to speak at all. Ethical? To society and the normal person, this seems to be invasive and unethical in many ways, but to Woodward and Bernstein, this may have been fine, given the nature of their job. Alternatively, Woodward and Bernstein may have known their ways were unethical, but because of the nature of the story and pressures they encountered, they knew it had to be done to publish a successful story.
Because of the position Woodward and Bernstein were in, I feel they handled this situation well. In journalism and reporting, it is your job to find information at all costs and release the information for the nation to see, ethics aside. Woodward and Bernstein had no emotional connection to the scandal, so I feel they were more obligated to take the story on, from the stance that a President of The United States was wrongfully leading the nation, plain and simple. If I were in their shoes, I would have done the same thing. Woodward and Bernstein did nothing to affect the law illegally, vowing to keep their sources anonymous, and knew that they were protected under the First Amendment, Freedom of Press and Speech. They simply wanted to reach the bottom of the scandal, and unfold all the unethical moves of the President.
All in all, both Woodward and Bernstein were put in difficult situations as journalists when dealing with this case. The magnitude of the case weighed in on the decisions Woodward and Bernstein made, both ethically and unethically. Because there is such a fine line when it comes to ethics, this movie is a personal judgment on how you base correct conduct and or good character. Woodward and Bernstein succeed with reporting the Watergate Scandal, setting standards for journalism and the job of a reporter, showing that there is more to the story sometimes, especially with the government.
Sources
All The President’s Men. (1976). http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074119/
Course Lecture 4.1 – Introduction to Journalism Ethics
Course Lecture 4.2 – Journalism Ethical Framework
FBI’s No. 2 Was ‘Deep Throat’: Mark Felt Ends 30-Year Mystery of The Post’s Watergate Source. (2005). http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/fbis-no-2-was-deep-throat-mark-felt-ends-30-year-mystery-of-the-posts-watergate-source/2012/06/04/gJQAwseRIV_story.html
Good work!