Ethics in journalism give an extra weight to the responsibilities like gate keeping, score keeping and as a watch dog, of a journalist. Always bound by these fundamentals in mind, a writer of an ocean of new information brings out sheets of awareness that anticipate a change in the world each new day. While these ethics might be overlooked by many, there are a few stories that have moved with the foundation. One among many such stories is that of the Watergate scandal which was connected with the burglary at the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in the Watergate office-apartment-hotel complex. The book “all the president’s men” is a paradigm of ethical journalism authored by the journalists involved in the investigation of the scandal, Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward.

This article provides evidence of dutiful and unbiased examples of journalism activities that had happened during the case with the oversight of Woodward and Bernstein. The evidences of the fundamentals viz. watch dog, gate keeping and score keeping are provided below with their respective meanings.

Watch dog

This aspect of ethical journalism underlines the duty of a journalist to be a spokesman of the people, be one to bring out all that which the government is doing for its citizens. It means to assure transparency by letting the people know what the government is doing. Snippets from the book that affirm to this definition are:

A $ 25,000 cashier’s check, apparently earmarked for the campaign chest of President Nixon*, was deposited in April in the bank account of Bernard L. Barker, one of the five men arrested in the break-in and alleged bugging attempt at Democratic National Committee headquarters here June 17.

Chapter 2, page number 44

On August 22, the second day of Republican convention in Miami, the Post’s front page reported preliminary findings of the GAO’s audit. Based primarily on Woodward’s conversations with the investigators, the story said the GAO* had determined that CRP* had mishandled more than $500,000 in campaign funds- including at least $ 100.000 maintained in an apparently illegal “security fund”.

Chapter 3, page number 48, 2nd paragraph

Funds for the Watergate espionage-operation were controlled by several principal assistants of John N.Mitchell, the former manager of President Nixon’s campaign, and were kept in a special account at the committee for the re-election of the President, the Washington Post has learned.

The story also reported: the fund contained more than $ 300,000 earmarked for sensitive political projects; Gordon Liddy was among those who received money from the fund; records relating to the account had been destroyed; Hugh Sloan’s resignation had been the result of his suspicions about Watergate.

Chapter 4, page number 73, 4th paragraph

Two of President Nixon’s top campaign officials each withdrew more than $ 50,000 from a secret fund that financed the bugging of Democratic headquarters, according to sources close to the Watergate investigation.

Chapter 4, page number 77, 3rd paragraph

John N.Mitchell, while serving as U.S Attorney General, personally controlled a secret Republican fund that was used to gather information about the Democrats, according to sources involved in the Watergate investigation.

Beginning in the spring of 1971, almost a year before he left the Justice Department to become President Nixon’s campaign manager on March 1, Mitchell personally approved withdrawals from the fund, several reliable sources have told the Washington Post.

Four persons other than Mitchell were later authorized to approve payments from the secret fund, the sources said.

Two of them were identified as former Secretary of Commerce Maurice H.Stans, now finance chairman of the President’s campaign, and Jeb Stuart Magruder, manager of the Nixon campaign before Mitchell took over and now a deputy director of the campaign. The other two, according to the sources, are a high White House official now involved in the campaign and a campaign aide outside of Washington.

The rest of the story dealt with how the fund operated: Sloan’s* phone calls to Mitchell, withdrawals by Liddy, Porter and Magruder, and the GAO’s determination that even the existence of the fund was apparently illegal because the expenditures had not been reported.

The remarks of Mitchell thrown at Bernstein when he had called him at eleven thirty in the night to discuss about the story were also published in the Post.

Chapter 5, page number 103-104, 4th paragraph

Score keeping

This aspect of ethical journalism underlines the responsibility of a journalist to send out unbiased data and keep the audience aware of any new information.

The story that Bernstein and Woodward were working on, related to H.R Haldeman* is an example of score keeping. They had slogged off to have the news reported without an bias against anyone by having interviewed many people and having changed the lead from Haldeman’s control of the fund attributed not only to accounts of sworn testimony before the Watergate  grand jury but to federal investigators as well. Also the thought of even sending out a printed apology to stoner for misinterpreting what he had told the grand jury was rejected. This proves that the Washington post was determined to post anything but not a biased report or information.

The media also kept the citizens updated of any new information. The examples for this can be matched with those already provided for “watch dog”.”

Chapter 9                                                                           

Gate keeping

This aspect of journalism underlines the duty of the journalist to decide what goes into the newspaper and what doesn’t. It is just like the duty of a gate keeper who decides who to send in and who to send out. Snippets from the book that affirm to this definition are:

The above is the conversation that took place between Mitchell and Bernstein

Mitchell: “what time is it?”

Bernstein: “eleven thirty at night. The committee has issued a statement about the story, but I’d like to ask       you a few questions about the specifies of what the story contains.”

Mitchell: “did the committee tell you to go ahead and publish that story? You fellows got a great ballgame going. As soon as you’re through paying Ed Williams and the rest of those fellows, we’re going to do a story on all of you.”

He hung up.

[NOTE: a couple of dialogues have been omitted]

Bernstein was determined to get Mitchell’s remarks into the paper. After repeated requests by Moore to not have the remarks printed or published, Bradlee disagreed to give in to his request and therefore the report was published.

Chapter 5, page number 103-104, 4th paragraph

Index

GAO: An independent nonpartisan federal agency that acts as the investigative arm of Congress making the executive branch accountable to Congress and the government accountable to citizens of the United States.

CRP: California Republican Party

President Nixon: senior member of the Republican Party in the US.

Sloan: treasurer of the committee to re-elect the President

H.R Haldeman: Ex white house chief of staff to President Richard Nixon