Having looked at Woodward and Bernstein in Semester 1, thanks to the presentation given by Liam, the session in Semester 2, built on the knowledge and understanding of the role, that these two gentlemen played in the uncovering of the whole Watergate scandal back in 1972.
Their role in the way journalism has evolved over the last 40 years, cannot and should not be understated. Without their tenacity and dogged determination, the way in which Governments are held to account could have been a very different prospect.
It highlighted to me the importance of building contacts and networking over a significant period, as without the relationship between Woodward and Felt, the man known during the investigation as “Deep Throat”, the whole scandal may not have come to prominence in such a large way.
Going forward in my journalism career, I recognise that it is very important to ensure that my contacts are made, managed and used appropriately. You never know when someone or something may play huge importance in any journalistic investigation. Large stories do not just fall into your lap, but by having the contacts there, even in a small way, you can react to things, and maybe break the big one, as Woodward and Bernstein did.
Their legacy is still spoken about over 40 years after the event, and it proves that journalists can have a huge influence on the Governments and those in High Office. Journalism though has changed over those 40 years, with fewer jobs within the industry, and less money devoted to the investigative side of the industry, so the question was asked during the session, “If Watergate happened today, would the resulting journalism still uncover the truth?”
The closest scandal that we have had here in the UK was the Expenses Row which resulted in some Member’s of Parliament being jailed for their involvement. Without a free press, and investigative journalists, this may not have come to the prominence that it did, and the changes to MP’s finances that it has made.
Personally, I think that it could and it really should, but with all the pressures put on the editor of the Washington Post back in the 1970’s, those would only be larger today, with newspapers being run as businesses, rather than just reporting the news.
Would an editor or publisher be able to resist the financial constraints that would be threatened? I’m not sure that many would, but there are exceptions out there that buck that trend.
Newspapers and media organisations are the free press, but most have an allegiance to a particular political party, and those that don’t, may feel pressured by advertisers to not release a story, by threatening to withdraw their cash, and take it elsewhere.
Jools Oughtibridge 