JOUR 485 Reflective Midterm Blog Post

After watching “All the President’s Men,” I was truly amazed at how both Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein were able to uncover the details of the Watergate Scandal. They both went above and beyond in their efforts of covering this story.

The two reporters applied the “Paul Williams Way” of investigative reporting in several ways while reporting on the Watergate Scandal. The first step in this process is conception which is the creation of the story. To do this, both Woodward and Bernstein had to keep up with current news and seek new stories from anything around them.

The specific point where Woodward conceptualized the story was when he was in the courthouse covering what was believed to be a regular break-in. While covering this case he began to uncover some details that did not add up, so he returned to the office and consulted his colleagues who share whatever information they had gathered from their sources. Later that night one of Woodward’s sources in the FBI revealed what was written in the bugler’s address book and the story was born.

Woodward and Bernstein continued to apply the “Paul Williams Way” of investigative reporting by frequently evaluating the state of the story to see what weaknesses it had. A major issue that they were constantly struggling with was that all their sources were anonymous. They also had to consider being physically harmed as they developed the story and uncovered more details.

The two reporters left no stone unturned while piecing together their investigation. They drowned themselves in other newspapers, records, and whatever else they could get their hands on to advance the story. Despite the two running into several dead ends, they continued digging for the information they needed.

Later on in the investigation, Woodward and Bernstein had a list of people in the Committee to Re-elect the President (CREEP) who were potentially involved in the Watergate Scandal or at least had a new lead. By interviewing both current and former members of CREEP, they had created a people trail which helped them create a complete story.

While Woodward and Bernstein were making slow and steady progress on this investigation, they struggled with sources requesting to remain anonymous. These sources did not want to be “whistleblowers” by releasing incriminating information about the scandal. This was an issue because the story would not be as solid without naming the sources. Woodward and Bernstein made sure to follow the people trail confirming information from previous sources to help strengthen the story while also making sure it was accurate.

To complete the investigation, Woodward and Bernstein followed a broad but valuable lead from a source in the FBI. The source simply told them to follow the money. With that small piece of information, Woodward and Bernstein tracked the money going in and out of Nixon’s campaign re-election fund. This lead is what eventually brought the two reporters all the way up to investigating some of the top officials in the Executive Branch.

A major dilemma that Woodward and Bernstein faced was the fact that they had so many anonymous sources. This weakens the story as people want to know where this information came from. Regardless, they kept their word and left their anonymous sources unnamed.

The two reporters continued to practice investigative journalism ethically verifying every detail of the story with multiple sources and identifying themselves as Washington post reporters before every phone call conversation and interview. Although they continued to dig for information from sources who said they did not want to talk anymore, there is nothing that says being extremely persistent is violating a journalist’s code of ethics.

This investigation of the Watergate Scandal reviled the corruption within the American government at the highest level. This exposure of corruption forced President Nixon to resign from office as he would inevitably be removed. This case served as a landmark for investigative journalism as it proved how it can bring justice down on those who deserve it. It was especially important because it was all relating to the most powerful man in the country, proving that no matter a person’s status, they can and will be exposed.

The Washington post as well as the reporters faced many obstacles while investigating the scandal. The post received negative feedback from people as the stories they published were implying that America’s Executive Branch was corrupt. A major obstacle the reporters struggled with was how most of their sources did not want to be named. This affected the story's credibility and made it more difficult for Woodward and Bernstein to complete the investigation. Also, the story was originally denied by their editor as they had not even scratched the surface of the investigation. Another issue the two faced was simply getting a hold of the people they needed to talk to. They were hung up on, denied access to meetings, and had doors slammed on them while they were trying to build this case.

Ultimately, Woodward and Bernstein overcame these issues by being thorough and persistent. They gathered every detail they could and confirmed it was true with several sources. They were persistent by not stopping at roadblocks they encountered and finding ways around them. Especially when dealing with anonymous sources.

If this investigation happened today, it would have still taken a lot of interviews to piece together the story. Journalists today still go face-to-face to interview people. However, Woodward and Bernstein would have utilized the internet to access all the government records that they needed.

Some of the sources from the “Bug Suspect Got Campaign Funds” article by Woodward and Bernstein were the copy of the $25,000 check written to Dalhberg, court testimonies regarding the transferring of money, interviews with MacGregor, President Nixon’s campaign chief, and an interview with Powell Moore, director of press relations for CREEP. A lot of these sources had a neutral effect on the story or at very most raised suspicion on certain people. For example, all the information from the testimonies is just denying or claiming they do not know. One source that added to the story was the copy of the check written to Dalhberg. This was a piece of undeniable evidence that helped advance the story.

The importance of a reporter and editor worker closely together is apparent in this film. I learned that even though I might not get the response I want from an editor, it is best to trust their judgment and work with them to make a solid and complete story. For example, when Woodward and Bernstein only had statements from anonymous sources, their editor refused to publish the story and made them fill in the gaps. Obviously, this paid off for them in the end.

Having mutual trust between reporters and the editor is important because the editor is not going on interviews with the reporter. The reporter knows the story the best because they are conducting every interview, picking up on non-verbal cues, and can piece the whole thing together better than anyone else can. It is up to the editor to trust that the reporter is investigating something substantial and not wasting their time.

I also learned how to apply some investigative strategies I have learned about into real-life situations. For example, how Woodward and Bernstein followed the money from a check deposited in Florida all the way back to the burglars. I also learned how important ethics are in investigative journalism. If the reporters did not operate ethically no more anonymous sources would have given them information and the story would have been based on a hunch instead of factual evidence. This story would have never been what it is if the reporters disregarded ethics.

The informant from the FBI, Deep Throat, the editor for the Washington post, Ben Bradlee, and the bookkeeper for CREEP were all vital characters in “All the Presidents Men”. Deep Throat provided Woodward the information he needed to kick-start this investigation. Bradlee fought for Woodward to stay on the investigation early in the film even though it was turning out to be bigger than expected. The bookkeeper provided Bernstein with key information about what was happening with the money and who was involved. Without any of these characters, Woodward and Bernstein would have never revealed the truth about the Watergate Scandal.

If I could ask reporting duo anything, I would ask if they ever had any doubt about there being a story behind all of this. After countless dead ends and walking away from lengthy interviews with little to no new information I would have lost hope. Seeing their determination throughout this investigation is truly amazing.

On my honor, I have watched “All the President’s Men” in its entirety.

Word Count: 1458