Bob Woodward, Carl Bernstein and Me: The Full Story!
They are the Lennon and McCartney or, to talk American, the Rogers and Hammerstein, the Lewis and Clark and the Jack Benny and Bob Hope of modern journalism. The names Woodward and Bernstein inspired tens of thousands of us hacks to approach events from a slightly different perspective, a longer view and the scarcely concealed hope to be portrayed on film one day by the likes of Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman.
Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein were the men who brought down the President. And while that may be a simplistic recalling of the events which did for Richard Nixon in the Watergate scandal it's also fundamentally accurate. It was their dogged pursuit of the story behind the story which led to the impeachment proceedings and the resignation.
First as a student and later as a young journalist, I followed Watergate in what these days is known as real time i.e. I saw it unfold as it happened nearly four decades ago. With ever-growing avidity we watched incredulous as Tricky Dick Nixon, this stage villain from across the Atlantic, declared he was NOT a crook and that there'd be No Whitewash At The White House. Of course he was lying and was proved to be lying, which left us feeling even more thrillingly outraged and self righteous.
By the time that Nixon was long gone and Hollywood took over the story, I was working in the Holy City (Liverpool) on local radio, doing the daily grind - or rather the night shift. I remember going to see All The President's Men at the Odeon one Sunday afternoon, watching in awe as Redford and Hoffman met Deep Throat in glamorous underground car parks, followed the money and started to knock the dominoes down. At the end, exhilarated I was desperate to go to work.
So here we are 36 years later. We're on what's called Parking Level Three but we're adjacent to the car park itself, inside a suite in one of Washington's swishest hotels. Bob and Carl and Me; Woodward, Bernstein and I, shooting the breeze and discussing Barack Obama, George W. Bush and Tricky Dick Nixon. Thrilled again.
Enjoy! I did...
In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~43~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
I must have been in that same cinema watching 'All the president's men' as I still regard that film as pivotal for most liberals in that so divided country. Everything that those two fought for was jettisoned when Bush came to office and it is a fair assumption that under Bush,Woodward and Bernstein would never have produced the downfall of an elected President, another unpleasent thought is where were they under the Bush presidential years, I suppose they left it to Michael Moore, good choice
Complain about this comment
GULLIBILITY BEGINS AT HOME
When Kennedy gave his 'Ask not' speech I was fooled; only recently did I learn who wrote it.
When King 'had a dream' I had no doubt they were his words; what a fool.
Those who write words for the mouths of others are surely 'devious by appointment' - damning both.
I guess we might expect it of politicians, but religious leaders? Surely the speechwriters Machiavellian delight must be a beacon-call to any passing devil to 'sex up' the content?
Complain about this comment
Mr. Marshall, you compare yourself to Woodward and Bernstein? Now that really is funny. In the United States, the press is regarded as nearly another branch of government whose independence is one more check and balance that characterizes the structure of American government. While Woodward and Bernstein may have been accountable to their editor, readers, advertisers, the owners of the Washington Post Newspaper, they were not accountable to the government itself or the people it was investigating. It also had a vast slew of competitors who would have been only to happy to scoop them on the story if they'd had the opportunity. You on the other hand in case you have forgotten are an employee of what is in effect a government owned subsidiary. The conflict of interest is clear. Even worse, in a sense BBC is a quasi monopoly for much of the British media. Perhaps that is why BBC has failed to pursue some of the British government scandals with any vigor at all. These include the corrupt contracts for military hardware sold to Saudi Arabia, the honors for money scandal, and won't even release the Balen Report documenting its own corruption. As with the Watergate affair, those who would be exposed can claim that a probing outside investigation by reporters and public disclosure is not in the national interest. That's what they always say to cover up their corruption. As for you being a hack therefore, finally someone at BBC said somthing I can agree with.
Complain about this comment
#3 being referred to the moderators is proof that what I said about the lack of BBC being an independent journalist like Woodward and Bernstein is absolutely true. And they can't take it either. The truth about themselves is the last thing they want to hear.
Complain about this comment
When I were a lad, on a student exchange scheme in a wee town in Texas, the local paper masthead had a line that struck a chord then, and still does now:
'Hew close to the line; let the chips fall where they may'.
And, being a small town, I was subsequently privileged to meet and chat with the editor.
Charming chap, but despite the relative lack of news 'excitement' around his patch, ruthlessly devoted to the whole 'who, what, why, when..' thing and... especially... confirming the story.
Don't think he'd have thought much of a news environment, especially in the MSM where, to use Jon Humphry's words, 'stars' like him are there to 'interpret' what's happened for us.
I presume that includes adding, or subtracting something between what has actually happened, and what we need to know about. Often that's necessary to make it a well-structured story. But often it can be a little extra 'value' according to personal taste or corporate dictat, and go too far for my comfort.
And especially, of late, with the uncritical throughput of facts where provenance gives way to speed.
'It may not be true, but we were told it first' may be good enough for ratings, and indeed subsequent deniablity, but really isn't responsible reporting any more, is it?
I wonder what Bob and Carl think of the MSM they, amongst others, inspired to the standard it is today?
Complain about this comment
Well Peter: I too was inspired by the film and entered Northern Illinois University in 1984 as a journalism student and also helped pay my way by working at the university's daily newspaper.
We got tipped off by some University workers that the new president was misappropriating funds to do some unauthorized renovations to his university-provided home. Our stories lead to to a State investigation and hearing in SPringfield, Il -- and justice was done Chocago style.
The president resigned and was promptly given a pay raise and a job that allowed him to travel world.
That is how it works in Illinois -- as you might understand Peter having only recently received a taste of how things get done in Obama's Camelot here.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS