Watergate: an excuse for lax journalism

Watergate: the mere mention of that one word can spark the political fire that burns in many Americans. There is no doubt that Watergate changed the country, but the country was changed in more ways than just in politics. Journalism, among other things, evolved immensely due the effects of Watergate.

On June 13, 1972, 5 Republican men were discovered trespassing and stealing documents  in the Democratic party headquarters at the Watergate Complex in Washington D.C. The truth of the scandal and the revelation of President Nixon’s involvement were discovered and reported on by Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward of the Washington Post.

But what many people do not realize is that the way the scandal was discovered only required more secrets and more lies.

History teacher David Arrington commented that “[Watergate] proved that the media didn’t necessarily have to give up their sources and still get the job done. For example, [with] Deep Throat, nobody knew who he was until very recently. Even now, we are facing possible security issues because someone can say ‘oh, I don’t have to give up my source because my source is confidential.’”

The character of Deep Throat played a major part in the reveal of President Nixon’s involvement in the Watergate scandal, but no one knew his real identity until 1994. Although no one knew his true identity, Deep Throat was one of the major sources used by Woodward and Bernstein.

Does it not seem odd that such a huge portion of American history rested on the information given by an anonymous source? True, Deep Throat turned out to be an entirely credible source:  his identity was later revealed as Mark Felt, second in command of the FBI at the time of the scandal. But what if he had not been? He easily could have lied or given false information, and completely changed the fate of the country.

How can journalists know that the information they are getting is correct if they have no idea that they are dealing with a credible source? Does that not break every rule of journalism? The information that came from the Watergate scandal in 1972 completely morphed the idea of honest journalism into something that is not always based on fact.

In a time of desperation, the American public was willing to be lead in the dark by people without a light. And very few seemed to care. Very few questioned and very few tried to find the truth. Most people were content with what they were given, and were not terribly concerned with finding truth.

This must end now. People have to start caring that what they are learning is accurate. Otherwise, everyone will be in the same boat: misinformed and mislead.