Without verification of the sources it would be strenuous for the reporters to do their job as they pursue their desire to scrupulously expose the corruption, no matter how overwhelming a journalist’s story has if the sources and witnesses or the persons involved will always go “off the record” although it is their right to hide themselves for security reasons, yet the story would be perceived far-fetched and rubbish since they can’t use the testimonies nor the information they acquired from the “anonymous sources” because the context would be considered malicious. This is the greatest dilemma that the two leading characters, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein in the movie All the President’s Men, are facing. Aside from that were the threats and surveillances they were bravely bearing. As journalists especially when you’re doing investigative reports, it is possible to normalize threats as part of the job, because as what Sheila Coronel accentuate that the role of media is to ferret out the truth, monitors the powers, expose excesses and corruption and holding those in power accountable. In this context, media as a watchdog is expected to bark and bite.
All the President’s Men, is an investigative and non-fiction film following the chain towards the uncovering of truth by the two persevering journalists Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein of the Washington Post as they crack up a deeper and a complex story on a simple break in at Watergate complex. Both applied strategic journalistic skills intelligently.
The production of the story, in my observation, is much concerned on the “process” on how the characters deal with all the conflicts ꟷ what were the challenges they faced and what are the steps or journalistic strategies they made? And obviously the director is less concerned with the result that is why it is observable that from the beginning until the movie ends, the two journalists, Bob and Carl, were doing the processes of investigating a burglary and yet as they go in-depth it lead them all the way to a sophisticated corruption inside the White House, involving the powerful persons in the US in that present administration including the President himself, Richard Nixon.
The story started when Bob Woodward as relatively reporting on conventional stories, but this time around it is in his great surprise when he stumbled at a historic political issue and was able to make a story about it. He was assigned to do a report on the burglars that were arrested, he attended the arraignment and there he started to discover an astounding discovery, when someone from the burglars affirmed himself that he formerly works in the CIA. Driven by curiosity, he started to frame theory that there were other persons involved when he is interviewing a dubious attorney named Mark who’s also in the court. Meanwhile, he received a tip that there were names and numbers found in the address books of two of the burglars, there he started to investigate the persons whom he found out they are possibly linked in to the Watergate scandal. It is fortunate for him that he has a senior editor who is knowledgeable enough that can be asked and guide him especially about the profile of the influential personalities.
Despite the fact that Woodward and Bernstein have really diverse personality, they were able to make a good tandem as their field called upon their professional ego. Woodward and Bernstein found the importance of searching on to the related articles, events and other means possible not only the primary sources but even secondary sources. Another is I don’t see any problem on etiquette they were showing since they were both very ethical on asking questions, also every time they are interviewing someone they take note of the information they acquire and even the expressions and emotions of the interviewees like what Bob Woodward did. He uses directories and photos to find and contact people, he is very observant and relentlessly searching up the sources and talk about their knowledge on what was happening.
Bernstein used his sensible persuasion in interviewing like what he did in interviewing Sharon Lyons who works in Colson’s office, it’s funny but he definitely uses his charm to attract the woman just to get some information he was able to get them too but the next thing happened is everyone is like dodging the investigation, concealing the information which is really expected in any investigations, so they went to the Library of Congress to look for the books’ Howard Hunt used to investigate Kennedy however the transactions were subject into confidentiality so they get what were available and they got the bunch of requests from the whole year of 1971 and checked it one-by-one yet they failed to get what they want and most probably it’s been hidden.
Moreover, their EIC Bradlee is pressing them up to get more verified information from credible sources because again they’re having struggles on persuading the sources to confirm and reveal themselves, it also came to the point that they’ve been door-slammed by people who are in the list of Committee to Re-elect. “Deep Throat” a whistle blower who remains himself hidden all throughout, gives an adequate information however cannot be inveterate to be credible source as they only know him as a “garage freak” who knows a deep background on politics. Competition is tough then against New York Times so they need to work harder to surpass their competitor and Bradlee’s imperatives squeezing them to their limit helped them a lot tooꟷ that is to aim accuracy and reliability.
In the end, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein were able to unleash the corruption that was perpetrated in a long time. The President’s five men involved together with other persons involved in the corruption were convicted and Nixon resigned on his post.
Altogether, I have learned that the relationship between a writer and the editor is really very important to achieve what is the news organization’s goal because a flawed relationship between them would result a flawed article. Investigative journalism should be taken seriously, it is not very easy to enter and get out of the situation ― once you’re in there you should be fully equipped to face the possibilities that will come through your path especially when you’re life would be jeopardized.
“Zechariah 8:16, these are the things you shall do: Speak the truth to one another; render in your gates judgments that are true to make for peace.”
