Woodward, Bob en Carl Bernstein - Geskiedenis

Woodward, Bob en Carl Bernstein - Geskiedenis


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Woodward, Bob &

Carl Bernstein

Joernalis


Bekroonde ondersoekende joernaliste Woodward en Bernstein het bekendheid verwerf tydens die onstuimige era van Watergate. As verslaggewers van die Washington Post het hulle die aard van die Watergate -episode blootgelê.

Hulle het verder die topverkoper geskryf Al die president se manne (1974), 'n verslag van die episode en die gevolglike skandaal. Woodward het verskeie senior poste by die koerant aangeneem terwyl Bernstein na televisie verhuis het, en in verskillende hoedanighede by ABC gewerk het, waaronder die Washington -burohoof.


Woodward & Bernstein: The Movie

Alhoewel die film die gevolg is van Redford se vasberadenheid om dit te laat ontwikkel terwyl die Watergate -verhaal ontvou, het die egtheid en uithouvermoë daarvan alles te doen met die regisseur, Alan J. Pakula, wat met 'n notaboek in 'n Sigmund Freud verander het voordat 'n kamera gerol het. Sy gedetailleerde aantekeninge, wat eers in Desember 2005 bekend gemaak is, is deur sy vrou aan die Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences geskenk ná sy dood in 1998 in 'n motorongeluk. Hulle wys hoe Pakula na sy protagoniste kom kyk het.

In Januarie 1975, vyf maande nadat president Nixon bedank het, vlieg Pakula na Washington om 'n diepgaande onderhoude te begin met 'n dosyn hoofde wat betrokke was by die ontknoping van die verhaal van Watergate. Hy gaan sit saam met Woodward, toe 32, Bernstein, toe 31, hul redakteurs, hul vriende en die twee vroue in die sentrum van die verslaggewers se lewens. Woodward was getroud met die verslaggewer Francie Barnard, en Bernstein was op 'n afspraak met Nora Ephron, met wie hy op 14 April 1976 getroud is, tien dae nadat die film in Washington verskyn het.

Pakula wou nie alleen feite hê nie. Hy wou Woodward en Bernstein diep verstaan, sodat hy hul ware karakters en motiverings vir die film kon vasvang. Ben Bradlee, redakteur van die Washington Post tydens Watergate, het vir my gesê dat Pakula baie tyd saam met ons deurgebring het. Hy het alles van my ma, broer, alles geweet. & Quot (Jason Robards, wat Bradlee gespeel het, is slegs 10 minute op die skerm.)

Tydens Watergate, ongeag hoe goed Bernstein die verhaal berig het, is hy vasgepen Washington Post redakteurs as die 'slegte seun' van die duo - altyd laat, onbetroubaar en vinnig om sy leidrade te lok. In haar onderhoud met Pakula het Ephron probeer om die reputasie van haar kêrel te herstel. Sy het gesê dat Bernstein gedryf is om die Watergate -verhaal te ontbloot, omdat hy almal wou bewys Post verkeerde. Hy was nie lui nie, het sy volgehou. Hy het net 'n 'psigose' gehad omdat hy deur gesagsfigure beheer word.

Die aantekeninge uit Pakula se onderhoud met Ephron onthul 'n sleutel tot sy begrip van Woodward en Bernstein. "Onder al die argumente en gevegte - tot onder, het hulle mekaar gehaat," het Pakula geskryf. & quot Die eienskappe wat mekaar gehad het - die eienskappe wat hulle nodig gehad het [om Watergate aan te meld] - het hulle nie gehou nie. Bob suig vir mense. Carl het geweet dat hy [die kwaliteit] nodig het, maar het dit in Bob verag. Bob het Carl nodig omdat Carl opdringerig was. Bob kan formuleer en Carl kan gevolgtrekkings maak. & Quot

Een verhaal wat Ephron met Pakula gedeel het, het betrekking gehad op hoe die twee verslaggewers gespaar het toe hulle jaag om die boek te voltooi Al die president se manne. Woodward, het sy aan die regisseur gesê, kan 'n koppige en 'n kopkop wees en 'n instink hê om te skryf. .

Pakula se aantekeninge, gedateer 2 Mei 1975, dui aan dat hy dit oor die twee verslaggewers afgesluit het:

  • Bob het gedink Carl was & quothype, geen opvolging nie. Alles praat. Bul ---- kunstenaar. Onverantwoordelik. & Quot
  • Carl het Bob as 'n kwota -masjien beskou. Hy is 'n verslaggewerpop. Gee hom 'n storie, enige verhaal, en hy hardloop daarmee. 'N Hommeltuig. Geen humor nie. Geen verrassings nie. Alle stabiliteit. Witbrood. Meneer Perfek. Geen siel. & Quot

Pakula het geleidelik besef dat nóg Woodward nóg Bernstein alleen Watergate kon afgetrek het. Ten spyte van hul groot verskille, het hulle mekaar nodig gehad. Elkeen het sterkpunte wat die ander s'n aanvul.

"Bernstein kan intuïtief reg wees - maar gevaarlik vir homself," het Pakula in sy aantekeninge geskryf. & quotWoodward sou versigtig van een stap letterlik na die ander moes gaan. En tog was dit Bernstein se waagmoed wat nodig was. & Quot

Maar in sy onderhoud met Woodward, ontdek Pakula dat die verslaggewer kan verras: ander mense se geheime het hom gefassineer en behep. Hoewel Woodward huiwerig was om oor homself as verslaggewer te praat, was hy vasbeslote om ander mense se geheime bloot te lê. Die tweespalt het Pakula aangegryp.

Maar toe Pakula Woodward begin verstaan, wonder hy of die sjarmante, aantreklike Redford, toe 39, iemand so anders as homself kan speel. Woodward beweeg logies. Sy ongegronde vrees om afgedank te word en sy behoefte om aan te behoort, het sy werkslawe lewenstyl aangevuur.

Pakula het geskryf dat Redford sy sjarme moet ontwrig. Dit is die vierkantige, reguit, intense, ordentlike kwaliteit van Woodward wat werk. Redford kan die kompulsiewe dryfkrag kry. Kan hy die seer en kwesbaarheid kry? & Quot

Gedurende die verfilming in 1975, as daar 'n vraag was oor hoe Woodward of Bernstein sou reageer, het Redford of Hoffman of Pakula 'n man gebel. "Dit was die eerste film wat ek ooit gemaak het," het Hoffman vir my gesê. Ons het aanhou probeer om vas te hou aan die egtheid van wat gebeur het deur byna daagliks met hulle te praat. & quot

Wanneer hulle kon, het Woodward en Bernstein die stelle besoek. Een middernag in Junie 1975 kyk Bernstein toe Pakula 'n toneel regisseer. Hoffman hardloop in 'n leë straat en jaag agter Redford se grys Volvo aan toe hy by die Post -parkeerterrein uitstap. Hy het geskree, & quotStop! . Woodward! Stop! & Quot

Bernstein onthou in 'n onderhoud van 1975, nou in Pakula se argief, dat 'n groot menigte buite was. Ek kom daar net toe Hoffman uit die gebou breek. Dit was een van die ongelooflikste gevoelens wat ek in my lewe gehad het, want dit is lankal sedert ons aan die verhaal begin werk het, en ek het nie presies geweet wie ek was nie en wie hy was was-eksistensieel, dit was 'n totale verstand ----. Hy het die maniere gehad. Jy is nie gewoond daaraan om jou optrede te sien nie. Tog het ek geweet dat hy reg was. & Quot

Terwyl Hoffman hardloop, het Bernstein, wat reeds 'n beroemdheid was, verstaan ​​hoeveel gebeur het in die drie jaar sedert vyf inbrekers by die Demokratiese Party se hoofkwartier by die Watergate -hotel ingebreek het.

"Ek is nie meer so nie," het Bernstein in die onderhoud gesê. Dit het lankal gebeur. Sou ek weer so hardloop? & Quot


Inhoud

Die Washington Post word beskou as een van die voorste Amerikaanse koerante [13] saam met Die New York Times, die Los Angeles Times, en Die Wall Street Journal. Die Post het hom onderskei deur sy politieke verslagdoening oor die werking van die Withuis, die Kongres en ander aspekte van die Amerikaanse regering.

Anders as Die New York Times en Die Wall Street Journal, Die Washington Post druk nie 'n uitgawe vir verspreiding weg van die ooskus nie. In 2009 het die koerant sy publikasie gestaak Nasionale weeklikse uitgawe ('n kombinasie van verhale uit die week se gedrukte uitgawes), as gevolg van krimpende sirkulasie. [14] Die meerderheid van die leserspubliek van sy koerantpapier is in die District of Columbia en sy voorstede in Maryland en Noord -Virginia. [15]

Die koerant is een van 'n paar Amerikaanse koerante met buitelandse buro's wat in Bagdad, Beijing, Beiroet, Berlyn, Brussel, Kaïro, Dakar, Hong Kong, Islamabad, Istanbul, Jerusalem, Londen, Mexiko -stad, Moskou, Nairobi, New Delhi, Rio de Janeiro, Rome, Tokio en Toronto. [16] In November 2009 kondig dit die sluiting van sy Amerikaanse streekburo's - Chicago, Los Angeles en New York - aan as deel van 'n groter fokus op 'politieke verhale en plaaslike nuusdekking in Washington'. [17] Die koerant het plaaslike buro's in Maryland (Annapolis, Montgomery County, Prince George's County en Suidelike Maryland) en Virginia (Alexandria, Fairfax, Loudoun County, Richmond en Prince William County). [18]

Vanaf Mei 2013 [update], was die gemiddelde oplaag op weeksdae 474,767, volgens die ouditburo vir sirkulasies, wat dit die sewende grootste koerant in die land in omloop maak, agter USA Today, Die Wall Street Journal, Die New York Times, die Los Angeles Times, die Daaglikse nuus, en die New York Post. Alhoewel die verspreiding (soos byna alle koerante) aan die afneem is, het dit daagliks een van die hoogste markpenetrasies van enige metropolitaanse nuus.

Vir baie dekades het die Post het sy hoofkantoor in 1150 15th Street NW. Hierdie vaste eiendom het by Graham Holdings gebly toe die koerant in 2013 aan Jeff Bezos 'Nash Holdings verkoop is. Graham Holdings verkoop 1550 15th Street (saam met 1515 L Street, 1523 L Street, en grond onder 1100 15th Street) vir US $ 159 miljoen in November 2013. Die Washington Post het voortgegaan om ruimte te huur by Lstraat 1150 L NW. [19] In Mei 2014 het Die Washington Post verhuur die westelike toring van One Franklin Square, 'n hoë gebou in K Street NW 1301 in Washington, DC. Die koerant verhuis na sy nuwe kantore op 14 Desember 2015. [20]

Die Post het sy eie eksklusiewe poskode, 20071.

Arc Publishing is 'n departement van Die Washington Post, wat die uitgewersisteem Arc bied, sagteware vir nuusorganisasies soos die Chicago Tribune en die Los Angeles Times. [21]

Stigting en vroeë periode Redigeer

Die koerant is in 1877 gestig deur Stilson Hutchins (1838–1912), en in 1880 het dit 'n Sondaguitgawe bygevoeg en die stad se eerste koerant geword wat sewe dae per week verskyn. [22]

In April 1878, ongeveer vier maande na publikasie, Die Washington Post gekoop Die Washington Unie, 'n mededingende koerant wat laat in 1877 deur John Lynch gestig is Unie was slegs ongeveer ses maande in bedryf ten tyde van die verkryging. Die gekombineerde koerant is uit die Globe Building gepubliseer as Die Washington Post en Union begin op 15 April 1878, met 'n oplaag van 13 000. [23] [24] Die Pos en vakbond die naam is ongeveer twee weke gebruik tot 29 April 1878, en die volgende dag teruggekeer na die oorspronklike kop. [25]

In 1889 verkoop Hutchins die koerant aan Frank Hatton, 'n voormalige posmeester -generaal, en Beriah Wilkins, 'n voormalige Demokratiese kongreslid van Ohio. Om die koerant te bevorder, het die nuwe eienaars die leier van die United States Marine Band, John Philip Sousa, versoek om 'n optog saam te stel vir die prysuitdeling van die koerant. Sousa het "The Washington Post" gekomponeer. [26] Dit het die standaardmusiek geword wat die tweestap, 'n laat 19de-eeuse dansgier, begelei [27] en bly een van die bekendste werke van Sousa.

In 1893 verhuis die koerant na 'n gebou in 14th en E strate NW, waar dit tot 1950 sou bly. Hierdie gebou het alle funksies van die koerant saamgevoeg in een hoofkwartier - nuuskamer, advertensies, setwerk en drukwerk - wat 24 uur per dag duur . [28]

In 1898, tydens die Spaans -Amerikaanse oorlog, het die Post die klassieke illustrasie van Clifford K. Berryman gedruk Onthou die Maine, wat tydens die oorlog die slagoffer van Amerikaanse matrose geword het. In 1902 publiseer Berryman nog 'n beroemde tekenprent in die PostTrek die streep in Mississippi. Hierdie tekenprent beeld president Theodore Roosevelt uit wat medelye toon met 'n klein beertjie en het die eienaar van die winkel in New York, Morris Michtom, geïnspireer om die teddiebeer te skep. [29]

Wilkins verkry Hatton se aandeel in die koerant in 1894 by Hatton se dood. Na Wilkins se dood in 1903, bestuur sy seuns John en Robert die Post vir twee jaar voordat hy dit in 1905 aan John Roll McLean, eienaar van die Cincinnati Enquirer. Tydens die Wilson -presidentskap het die Post is toegeskryf aan die 'bekendste koerantfout' in die geskiedenis van DC, volgens Rede tydskrif die Post bedoel om te rapporteer dat president Wilson sy toekomstige vrou, mev. Galt, "vermaak" het, maar in plaas daarvan het hy geskryf dat hy mev. Galt "binnegekom" het. [30] [31] [32]

Toe John McLean in 1916 sterf, het hy die koerant vertrou, omdat hy min vertroue gehad het dat sy playboy -seun Edward "Ned" McLean sy erfenis kon bestuur. Ned het hof toe gegaan en die vertroue verbreek, maar onder sy bestuur het die koerant in duie gestort. Hy het die koerant gebloei vir sy uitspattige leefstyl en dit gebruik om politieke agendas te bevorder. [33]

Gedurende die Rooi Somer van 1919 het die Pos die blanke skare ondersteun en selfs 'n voorbladverhaal wat die plek waar wit dienspligtiges van plan was om te ontmoet, aangevoer het om aanvalle op swart Washingtoniste uit te voer. [34]

Meyer – Graham tydperk Redigeer

In 1929 het finansier Eugene Meyer (wat die War Finance Corp. sedert die Eerste Wêreldoorlog bestuur het [35]) in die geheim 'n aanbod van $ 5 miljoen vir die Post, maar hy is deur Ned McLean tereggewys. [36] [37] Op 1 Junie 1933 koop Meyer die koerant op 'n bankrotveiling vir $ 825 000 drie weke nadat hy as voorsitter van die Federale Reserweraad uittree. Hy het anoniem gebie en was bereid om tot $ 2 miljoen te styg, baie hoër as die ander bieërs. [38] [39] Dit sluit William Randolph Hearst in, wat lankal gehoop het om die siekes te stop Post om sy eie teenwoordigheid in die koerant in Washington te bevoordeel. [40]

Die Post se gesondheid en reputasie is herstel onder Meyer se eienaarskap. In 1946 word hy opgevolg as uitgewer deur sy skoonseun, Philip Graham. [41] Meyer het uiteindelik die laaste lag gekry oor Hearst, wat die ou besit het Washington Times en die Herald voor hul samesmelting in 1939 wat die Times-Herald. Dit is op sy beurt gekoop deur en saamgevoeg in die Post in 1954. [42] Die gekombineerde vraestel is amptelik genoem Die Washington Post en Times-Herald tot 1973, hoewel die Times-Herald gedeelte van die naamplaatjie word mettertyd al hoe minder prominent. Die samesmelting het die Post met twee oorblywende plaaslike mededingers, die Washington Star (Aandster) en Die Washington Daily News wat in 1972 saamgesmelt het en die Washington Star-News. [43] [44]

Na die dood van Phil Graham in 1963, het die beheer oor The Washington Post Company oorgegaan na sy vrou Katharine Graham (1917-2001), wat ook die dogter van Eugene Meyer was. Min vroue het prominente nasionale koerante in die Verenigde State bestuur. Katharine Graham beskryf haar eie angs en gebrek aan selfvertroue toe sy 'n leiersrol in haar outobiografie betree. Sy was uitgewer van 1969 tot 1979. [45]

Graham het The Washington Post Company op 15 Junie 1971 openbaar gemaak te midde van die Pentagon Papers -kontroversie. 'N Totaal van 1 294 000 aandele is teen $ 26 per aandeel aan die publiek aangebied. [46] [47] Teen die einde van Graham se ampstermyn as uitvoerende hoof in 1991, was die aandeel $ 888 per aandeel werd, sonder om die effek van 'n tussentydse aandeelopdeling van 4: 1 in berekening te bring. [48]

Gedurende hierdie tyd het Graham ook toesig gehou oor die diversifikasie-aankoop van die Post-onderneming van die winsgewende onderwys- en opleidingsonderneming Kaplan, Inc. vir $ 40 miljoen in 1984. [49] Twintig jaar later het Kaplan die Post koerant as die belangrikste bydraer tot die inkomste van die onderneming, en teen 2010 was Kaplan meer as 60% van die totale inkomstestroom van die onderneming. [50]

Uitvoerende redakteur Ben Bradlee het die reputasie en hulpbronne van die koerant agter verslaggewers Bob Woodward en Carl Bernstein gelê, wat in 'n lang reeks artikels die storie agter die inbraak in 1972 in die kantore van die Demokratiese Nasionale Komitee in die Watergate -kompleks in Washington ontwrig het. Die Post Die sterk dekking van die verhaal, waarvan die uitkoms uiteindelik 'n groot rol gespeel het in die bedanking van president Richard Nixon, het die koerant in 1973 'n Pulitzer -prys gewen. [51]

In 1972 is die afdeling "Boekwêreld" bekendgestel met die Pulitzer-bekroonde kritikus William McPherson as die eerste redakteur. [52] Dit bevat kritici van die Pulitzer-prys, soos Jonathan Yardley en Michael Dirda, waarvan laasgenoemde sy loopbaan as kritikus by die Post. In 2009, na 37 jaar, met groot leserskreeu en protes, Die Washington Post Book World Aangesien 'n selfstandige insetsel gestaak is, was die laaste uitgawe Sondag 15 Februarie 2009 [53], tesame met 'n algemene herorganisasie van die koerant, soos om die Sondag -hoofartikels op die agterblad van die hoofvoorblad te plaas eerder as die "Outlook" "afdeling" en verspreiding van ander plaaslik georiënteerde "op-ed" briewe en kommentare in ander afdelings. [54] Boekresensies word egter steeds op Sondae in die Outlook -afdeling gepubliseer en die res van die week in die Style -afdeling, sowel as aanlyn. [54]

In 1975 het die vakbond van die persmanne gestaak. Die Post plaasvervangers aangestel om die vakbond van die persmanne te vervang, en ander vakbonde keer in Februarie 1976 weer aan die werk. [55]

Donald E. Graham, Katharine se seun, het haar in 1979 as uitgewer opgevolg. [45]

In 1995 is die domeinnaam washingtonpost.com gekoop. Dieselfde jaar het 'n mislukte poging om 'n aanlyn nuusberig genaamd Digital Ink te begin, begin. Die volgende jaar is dit gesluit en die eerste webwerf is in Junie 1996 bekendgestel. [56]

Jeff Bezos -era (2013 – hede) Redigeer

In 2013 het Jeff Bezos die koerant vir $ 250 miljoen gekoop. [57] [58] [59] Die koerant is nou in besit van Nash Holdings LLC, 'n maatskappy wat deur Bezos beheer word. [58] Die verkoop het ook ander plaaslike publikasies, webwerwe en vaste eiendom ingesluit. [60] [61] [62] Die voormalige moedermaatskappy van die koerant, wat 'n paar ander bates soos Kaplan en 'n groep TV -stasies behou het, is kort na die verkoop herdoop tot Graham Holdings Company. [11] [63]

Nash Holdings, insluitend die Post, word afsonderlik bedryf van die tegnologiemaatskappy Amazon, waarvan Bezos die uitvoerende hoof en die grootste enkele aandeelhouer is (met ongeveer 10,9%). [64] [65]

Bezos het gesê dat hy 'n visie het wat 'die' daaglikse ritueel 'van lees Post as 'n bundel, nie slegs 'n reeks individuele verhale nie. "[66] Hy word beskryf as 'n" hands-off eienaar ", wat elke twee weke telekonferensies met uitvoerende redakteur Martin Baron hou. [67] Bezos het Fred Ryan (stigter en uitvoerende hoof van Politiek) om as uitgewer en uitvoerende hoof te dien. Dit dui op Bezos se voorneme om die Post tot 'n meer digitale fokus met 'n nasionale en wêreldwye leserspubliek. [68]

In 2014 het die Post het aangekondig dat dit van 1150 15th Street verhuis na 'n gehuurde ruimte drie blokke verder by One Franklin Square in K Street. [69] Die afgelope jare het die Post 'n aanlyn afdeling vir persoonlike finansies bekendgestel, [70], sowel as 'n blog en 'n podcast met 'n retro -tema. [71] [72] Die Washington Post het die 2020 Webby -toekenning vir News & amp Politics in die kategorie Social gewen. [73] Die Washington Post het die 2020 Webby People's Voice -toekenning vir News & amp Politics in die kategorie Web gewen. [73]

1933–2000 Wysig

Toe finansier Eugene Meyer die bankrot koop Post in 1933 het hy die publiek verseker dat hy nie by 'n party sou wees nie. [74] Maar as 'n toonaangewende Republikein (dit was sy ou vriend, Herbert Hoover, wat hom in 1930 tot voorsitter van die Federale Reserweraad gemaak het), het sy opposisie teen FDR se New Deal die koerant se redaksionele standpunt sowel as die nuusberig ingekleur. Dit bevat die redaksionering van 'nuus' -verhale wat Meyer onder 'n skuilnaam geskryf het. [75] [76] [77] Sy vrou Agnes Ernst Meyer was polities 'n joernalis van die ander kant van die spektrum. Die Post het baie van haar stukke uitgevoer, waaronder huldeblyke aan haar persoonlike vriende John Dewey en Saul Alinsky. [78] [79] [80] [81]

Eugene Meyer word in 1946 die hoof van die Wêreldbank, en hy noem sy skoonseun Phil Graham om hom op te volg Post uitgewer. In die naoorlogse jare het die vriendskap tussen Phil en Kay Graham ontwikkel met die Kennedys, die Bradlees en die res van die 'Georgetown Set' (baie Harvard-alumni) wat die kleur van die Pos se politieke oriëntasie. [82] Die onvergeetlikste gaste lys van Kay Graham in Georgetown soirée bevat die Britse diplomaat/kommunistiese spioen Donald Maclean. [83] [84]

Die Post word toegeskryf aan die uitvinding van die term "McCarthyism" in 'n 1950 -redaksionele tekenprent deur Herbert Block. [85] Dit het emmers teer uitgebeeld, maar dit het bespot gemaak met senator Joseph McCarthy se "teer" taktiek, dit wil sê smeerveldtogte en karaktermoord teen diegene wat deur sy beskuldigings geteiken word. Sen. McCarthy het probeer om vir die senaat te doen wat die House Un-American Activities Committee al jare gedoen het-ondersoek na Sowjet-spioenasie in Amerika. Die HUAC het Richard Nixon nasionaal bekend gemaak vir sy rol in die Hiss/Chambers -saak wat kommunistiese spioenasie in die staatsdepartement blootgelê het. Die komitee het ontwikkel uit die McCormack-Dickstein-komitee van die dertigerjare. [86]

Die vriendskap van Phil Graham met JFK het sterk gebly tot hul ontydige dood in 1963. [87] J. Edgar Hoover, FBI -direkteur, het na bewering aan die nuwe president, Lyndon B. Johnson, gesê: 'Ek het nie veel invloed op die Post want ek lees dit eerlikwaar nie. Ek beskou dit soos die Daaglikse werker." [88] [89]

Ben Bradlee word in 1968 die hoofredakteur, en Kay Graham word amptelik die uitgewer in 1969, wat die weg baan vir die aggressiewe beriggewing van die Pentagon -vraestelle en Watergate -skandale. Die Post het die openbare opposisie teen die Viëtnam -oorlog in 1971 versterk toe dit die Pentagon -vraestelle. [90] In die middel van die sewentigerjare verwys sommige konserwatiewes na die Post as "Pravda op die Potomac "vanweë die vermeende linkse vooroordeel in beide beriggewing en hoofartikels. [91] Sedertdien is die benaming deur sowel liberale as konserwatiewe kritici van die koerant gebruik. [92] [93]

2000 -hede Redigeer

In die PBS -dokumentêr Koop die oorlog, het joernalis Bill Moyers gesê in die jaar voor die oorlog in Irak was daar 27 hoofartikels wat die Bush -administrasie se ambisies ondersteun om die land binne te val. Die korrespondent van die nasionale veiligheid, Walter Pincus, het berig dat hy beveel is om sy verslae wat krities is oor die administrasie, te staak. [94] Volgens die skrywer en joernalis Greg Mitchell: "By the Post se eie erkenning, in die maande voor die oorlog het dit meer as 140 verhale op die voorblad van die oorlog gelewer, terwyl teenstrydige inligting verlore geraak het. "[95]

Op 26 Maart 2007 het Chris Matthews op sy televisieprogram gesê: "Wel, Die Washington Post is nie die liberale koerant nie, kongreslid, laat ek jou vertel. Ek lees dit al jare en dit is 'n neocon-koerant. " Robinson), en sommige van hulle is regsgesind (insluitend George Will, Marc Thiessen, Michael Gerson en Charles Krauthammer).

In 'n studie wat op 18 April 2007 deur Yale-professore Alan Gerber, Dean Karlan en Daniel Bergan gepubliseer is, het burgers 'n inskrywing gekry vir óf die konserwatief-geneigde Washington Times of die liberaal-leunende Washington Post om die effek wat media op stempatrone het, te sien. Gerber het op grond van sy werk geraam dat die Post skuins soveel na links as die Tye regs gedoen het. Gerber het diegene gevind wat 'n gratis intekening op die Post Dit was 7,9–11,4% meer geneig om vir die Demokratiese kandidaat vir goewerneur te stem as dié wat aan die kontrolegroep toegewys is, afhangende van die aanpassing vir die datum waarop individuele deelnemers ondervra is en die opname -onderhoudvoerder, mense wat die Tye was ook meer geneig as kontroles om vir die Demokraat te stem, met 'n effek van ongeveer 60% so groot as wat vir die Post. [97] [98] Die skrywers van die studie het gesê dat steekproeffoute moontlik 'n rol gespeel het in die effek van die konserwatief-leunende Tye, net soos die feit dat die Demokratiese kandidaat meer konserwatief-leunende posisies ingeneem het as wat tipies is vir sy party, en "die maand voor die opname na die verkiesing was 'n moeilike tydperk vir president Bush, waarin sy algehele goedkeuringsgradering met ongeveer 4 persentasiepunte landwyd. Dit blyk dat 'n groter blootstelling aan albei koerante se nuusdekking, ten spyte van teenstrydige ideologiese inslag, die publieke opinie van Republikeine verwyder het. " [98]

In November 2007 is die koerant deur die onafhanklike joernalis Robert Parry gekritiseer omdat hy oor e-posse teen die Obama-ketting berig het, sonder om die vals aard van die anonieme bewerings genoegsaam aan sy lesers te beklemtoon. [99] In 2009 kritiseer Parry die koerant vir die beweerde onregverdige beriggewing oor liberale politici, waaronder vise -president Al Gore en president Barack Obama. [100]

In reaksie op kritiek op die dekking van die koerant tydens die aanloop tot die presidentsverkiesing in 2008, het voormalige Post ombudsman Deborah Howell het geskryf: "Die meningsbladsye het sterk konserwatiewe stemme, die redaksie bevat sentriste en konserwatiewes, en daar was redaksies wat kritiek op Obama was. Tog was die mening steeds teenoor Obama gerig." [101] Volgens 'n boek van Oxford University Press uit 2009 van Richard Davis oor die impak van blogs op Amerikaanse politiek, skakel liberale bloggers na Die Washington Post en Die New York Times konserwatiewe bloggers skakel egter ook meer gereeld as ander groot koerante, hoofsaaklik met liberale koerante. [102]

In die middel van September 2016 het Matthew Ingram van Forbes aangesluit by Glenn Greenwald van Die onderskep, en Trevor Timm van Die voog in kritiek Die Washington Post omdat hy "geëis het dat [voormalige kontrakteur van die National Security Agency Edward] Snowden teregstaan ​​op aanklagte van spioenasie". [103] [104] [105] [106]

In Februarie 2017 het die Post het die slagspreuk "Democracy Dies in Darkness" aangeneem vir sy kop. [107]

Sedert 2011 het die Post het 'n kolom met die naam "The Fact Checker" uitgevoer dat die Post beskryf as 'n 'waarheidsgroep'. [108] The Fact Checker het 'n toekenning van $ 250,000 van Google News Initiative/YouTube ontvang om die produksie van videofeekontroles uit te brei. [108]

Politieke goedkeurings Redigeer

Katharine Graham het in haar outobiografie geskryf Persoonlike geskiedenis dat die koerant lankal 'n beleid gehad het om geen goedkeuring vir politieke kandidate te maak nie. Sedert minstens 2000 onderskryf die koerant egter soms Republikeinse politici, soos die goewerneur van Maryland, Robert Ehrlich. [109] In 2006 herhaal dit sy historiese goedkeuring van elke Republikeinse posbekleër vir die kongres in Noord -Virginia. [110] Daar was ook tye dat die Post het spesifiek gekies om geen kandidaat te onderskryf nie, soos tydens die presidensiële verkiesing van 1988 toe hy geweier het om destydse goewerneur Michael Dukakis of destydse vise-president George H. W. Bush te onderskryf. [111] Op 17 Oktober 2008 het die Post het Barack Obama as president van die Verenigde State onderskryf. [112] Op 25 Oktober 2012 het die koerant die herverkiesing van Obama onderskryf. [113] Die Post het die Demokrate as president tydens minstens nege verskillende presidentsverkiesings onderskryf. [114] Die koerant het nog nooit 'n Republikein as president onderskryf nie. [114] Op 21 Oktober 2014 onderskryf die koerant 44 Demokratiese kandidate teenoor 3 Republikeinse kandidate vir die 2014 -verkiesing in die District of Columbia, Maryland en Virginia. [115] Op 13 Oktober 2016 onderskryf dit Hillary Clinton vir die presidentsverkiesing van daardie jaar. [116] Op 28 September 2020 onderskryf dit Joe Biden vir die Amerikaanse presidentsverkiesing in 2020. [117]

Die Post onderskryf die goewerneur van Maryland, Harry Hughes, en DC -burgemeester Marion Barry tydens die verkiesing van 1978.

"Jimmy's World" vervaardiging Bewerk

In September 1980 verskyn 'n Sondag -verhaal op die voorblad van die Post getiteld "Jimmy's World" waarin verslaggewer Janet Cooke 'n profiel van die lewe van 'n agtjarige heroïenverslaafde geskryf het. [118] Hoewel sommige binne die Post het getwyfel oor die waarheid van die verhaal, die redakteurs van die koerant het dit verdedig en die assistent -besturende redakteur, Bob Woodward, het die verhaal aan die Pulitzer Prize Board aan die Columbia -universiteit voorgelê vir oorweging. Cooke ontvang die Pulitzer -prys vir funksieskryf op 13 April 1981. Die verhaal is toe 'n volledige versinsel en die Pulitzer is teruggegee. [119]

Privaat "salon" werwing Redigeer

In Julie 2009, te midde van 'n intense debat oor hervorming van gesondheidsorg, Die Politiek berig dat 'n lobbyist in die gesondheidsorg 'n 'verstommende' aanbod van toegang tot die Pos se "verslagdoening oor gesondheidsorg en redaksie." [120] Post uitgewer Katharine Weymouth het 'n reeks eksklusiewe etes of 'salonne' in haar privaat woning beplan, waarna sy prominente lobbyiste, lede van die handelsgroep, politici en sakelui genooi het. [121] Deelnemers sou $ 25,000 in rekening gebring word om 'n enkele salon te borg, en $ 250,000 vir 11 sessies, terwyl die geleenthede vir die publiek en vir die nie-Post druk. [122] Politiek se onthulling het 'n ietwat gemengde reaksie in Washington gekry [ aanhaling nodig ], aangesien dit die indruk wek dat die partye se uitsluitlike doel was om insiders in staat te stel om tyd met mekaar te koop Post personeel.

Byna onmiddellik na die bekendmaking het Weymouth die salonne gekanselleer en gesê: "Dit moes nooit gebeur het nie." Gregory B. Craig, advokaat van die Withuis, het amptenare daaraan herinner dat hulle volgens federale etiese reëls vooraf goedkeuring vir sulke geleenthede benodig. Post Uitvoerende redakteur, Marcus Brauchli, wat op die strooibiljet aangewys is as een van die salon se "leërskare en besprekingsleiers", het gesê dat hy 'ontsteld' was oor die plan en bygevoeg: 'Dit dui daarop dat toegang tot Washington Post joernaliste was te koop. "[123]

China Daily advertensie -aanvullings Redigeer

Ons dateer uit 2011, Die Washington Post begin om advertensie -aanvullings van 'China Watch' in te sluit wat deur China Daily, 'n Engelse taalkoerant wat besit word deur die publisiteitsafdeling van die Kommunistiese Party van China, op die gedrukte en aanlyn uitgawes. Alhoewel die opskrif van die aanlyn afdeling "China Watch" die teks "A Paid Supplement to The Washington Post" bevat, het James Fallows van Die Atlantiese Oseaan het voorgestel dat die kennisgewing nie duidelik genoeg was vir die meeste lesers om te sien nie. [124] Versprei na die Post en verskeie koerante regoor die wêreld, wissel die advertensies bylae van "China Watch" van vier tot agt bladsye en verskyn dit ten minste maandeliks. Volgens 'n verslag van 2018 deur Die voog, "China Watch" gebruik "'n didaktiese, outydse benadering tot propaganda." [125]

In 2020 was 'n verslag van Freedom House, "Beijing's Global Megafoon", ook krities oor die Post en ander koerante vir die verspreiding van 'China Watch'. [126] [127] In dieselfde jaar het vyf en dertig Republikeinse lede van die Amerikaanse kongres in Februarie 2020 'n brief aan die Amerikaanse departement van justisie gerig waarin 'n ondersoek na moontlike FARA-oortredings deur China Daily. [128] Die brief noem 'n artikel wat in die Post, "Onderwysfoute gekoppel aan onrus in Hong Kong", as voorbeeld van "artikels [wat] dien as dekking vir die gruweldade van China, insluitend sy steun vir die ineenstorting in Hong Kong." [129] Volgens Die voog, die Post het al in 2019 opgehou om 'China Watch' te laat loop. [130]

Betaalpraktyke Wysig

In Junie 2018 het meer as 400 werknemers van Die Washington Post 'n ope brief aan die eienaar Jeff Bezos onderteken waarin hy 'billike lone billike voordele vir aftrede, gesinsverlof en gesondheidsorg en 'n redelike mate van werksekerheid eis'. Die ope brief is vergesel van video -getuienisse van werknemers, wat beweer het dat hulle 'skokkende betaalpraktyke' was ondanks rekordgroei in intekeninge by die koerant, met salarisse wat slegs gemiddeld $ 10 per week styg, minder as die helfte van die inflasiekoers. Die petisie het gevolg op 'n jaar van onsuksesvolle onderhandelinge tussen Die Washington Post Gilde en hoër bestuur oor loon- en voordeleverhogings. [131]

Regsgeding deur Covington Catholic High School -student Redigeer

In 2019 het die student van die Covington Katolieke Hoërskool Nick Sandmann 'n lastergeding teen die Posten beweer dat dit hom beledig het in sewe artikels oor die konfrontasie van Lincoln Memorial in Januarie 2019 tussen Covington -studente en die inheemse volksmars. [132] [133] In Oktober 2019 het 'n federale regter die saak van die hand gewys en beslis dat 30 van die 33 verklarings in die Post dat Sandmann beweer dat dit lasterlik was, nie, maar het Sandmann toegelaat om 'n gewysigde klag in te dien. [134] Nadat Sandmann se prokureurs die klag gewysig het, is die saak op 28 Oktober 2019 heropen. [135] Die regter het by sy vroeëre besluit gestaan ​​dat 30 van die Pos se 33 verklarings wat deur die klag gerig is, nie lasterlik was nie, maar was dit eens dat 'n verdere 'n hersiening was nodig vir drie verklarings wat "verklaar dat (Sandmann) Nathan Phillips 'geblokkeer het en' hom nie sou toelaat om terug te trek nie '". [136] Op 24 Julie 2020, Die Washington Post het die saak met Nick Sandmann besleg. Die bedrag van die skikking is nie bekend gemaak nie. [137]

Omstrede berigte en kolomme Redigeer

Verskeie Washington Post artikels en rubrieke het kritiek ontlok, waaronder 'n aantal opmerkings oor ras deur rubriekskrywer Richard Cohen oor die jare, [138] [139] en 'n omstrede rubriek van 2014 oor seksuele aanranding deur die kampus deur George Will. [140] [141] Die Post ' 's decision to run an op-ed by Mohammed Ali al-Houthi, a leader in Yemen's Houthi movement, was criticized by some activists on the basis that it provided a platform to an "anti-Western and antisemitic group supported by Iran." [142]

Critical Race Theory Controversy and Anti-Whiteness Edit

Washington has taken an aggressive Anti-Whiteness stance and promoted a multiple Crtical Race Theory columns and sections, including "Lily". [143]

At the same time, the Washington Post has run disinformation stories to suggest the issues with Critical Race Theory are made up by journalist Christopher Rufo. [144] Rufo proceeded to refute the Post claims on twitter, [145] showing the story was a made up "hit piece" [146]

Criticism by elected officials Edit

President Donald Trump has repeatedly railed against the Washington Post on his Twitter account, [147] having "tweeted or retweeted criticism of the paper, tying it to Amazon more than 20 times since his campaign for president" by August 2018. [148] In addition to often attacking the paper itself, Trump has used Twitter to blast various Post journalists and columnists. [149]

During the 2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries, Senator Bernie Sanders repeatedly criticized the Washington Post, saying that its coverage of his campaign was slanted against him and attributing this to Jeff Bezos' purchase of the newspaper. [150] [151] Sanders' criticism was echoed by the socialist magazine Jakobyn [152] and the progressive journalist watchdog Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting. [153] Washington Post executive editor Marty Baron responded by saying that Sanders' criticism was "baseless and conspiratorial". [154]


Post Editor Bradlee Discusses 'Deep Throat' Revelation

"Here we were, meeting with this publisher that wanted to do a book with us," Bernstein says. "And we were talking about whether we were going to have to resign from the paper."

"You've got to remember that the stakes of this thing by now were so high that the president of the United States and his spokespeople almost every day were attacking Die Washington Post for using innuendo and hearsay information," Bernstein says. "We had been assiduous and careful, and people were starting to really believe the stories we had written. And, boom, came this, and it looked like it could all be over."

But the investigation continued — and the book got published.

'Help Me. I Need Your Help'

Woodward says that the key to their reporting was the way they approached conversations with sources.

"This was a strategy that Carl developed: Go see these people at home at night when they're relaxed, when there are no press people around," Woodward says. "When the time is limitless to a certain extent and you're there saying, 'Help me. I need your help,' which are the most potent words in journalism. And people will kind of unburden themselves, or at least tell part of the story."

Over months of reporting, they pieced those partial stories together to reveal the sequence of events — without ever interviewing, or even meeting, the president at the heart of the conspiracy. Even in the years that followed, they never met Nixon.

Both men say that if they had the chance to ask Nixon one question, it would be a single word: "Why?" Why would a president who was heading for re-election anyway go to such extremes to win?

They suggest that Nixon already offered one answer to that question. "He even raises it himself in his farewell from the White House, [which] was so mesmerizing when you watched it," Bernstein says. "When you let your anger and hate rule you, that's when you do this terrible thing to yourself."

"And literally what he said is, 'Always remember. Others may hate you. But those who hate you don't win unless you hate them, and then you destroy yourself,' " Woodward remembers.

Nixon resigned 40 years ago this summer — less than two months after the publication of Al die president se manne.


How a reporting mistake nearly derailed the Watergate investigation — and how journalists recovered

The Trump White House’s escalating attacks on the news media after a string of journalism errors this month resemble assaults by Richard Nixon’s administration against The Washington Post when it made a mistake in a story about Watergate.

The president’s recent attacks began when Brian Ross of ABC News incorrectly reported on Dec. 1 that Donald Trump told national security aide Michael Flynn to contact Russian officials during the 2016 presidential campaign. Four days later, the Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg and other news outlets erred when they said that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III had subpoenaed Deutsche Bank for Trump’s financial records.

Then CNN mistakenly reported that Donald Trump Jr., the president’s son, knew in advance that WikiLeaks was going to release documents stolen from the Democratic National Committee. And Washington Post reporter Dave Weigel posted an inaccurate tweet on Dec. 9 about a Trump rally in Florida. In response, Trump demanded a retraction from “FAKE NEWS WaPo,” and press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders accused journalists of sometimes “purposely misleading the American people.” Even though Weigel readily apologized, Trump demanded that The Post fire him, which the paper declined to do.

These errors, and Trump’s eager celebration of them, recall a crucial moment when a reporting blunder almost stymied the most important political investigation in American media history — Watergate. After The Post made an embarrassing mistake in an October 1972 story about powerful White House Chief of Staff H.R. “Bob” Haldeman, press secretary Ronald Ziegler spent a half hour angrily denouncing the newspaper on behalf of the Nixon administration.

At the time, the Watergate scandal was drawing closer to Nixon’s inner circle, and the error became an opportunity for Nixon’s team to try to derail The Post’s investigation into widespread misconduct by his administration and reelection campaign.

And it almost worked. But the Post was able to recover by quickly figuring out what went wrong, making sure its reporters were careful to avoid similar mistakes and refusing to be intimidated by White House threats. Today’s journalists would do well to remember these lessons.

In the four months before the Haldeman story, Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein had made astonishing revelations about the involvement of people connected with the Nixon campaign and administration in burglary, domestic spying, evidence destruction and dirty tricks. As I explain in my book “Watergate’s Legacy and the Press: The Investigative Impulse,” they channeled the investigative spirit that had been building in journalism since the 1960s, as skepticism about government soared during the Vietnam War. And they used careful and relentless shoe-leather reporting to challenge the statements of the most powerful men in the country.

While most members of the Washington press corps focused on reporting the words of top officials, Bernstein and Woodward went to the homes of low-level campaign workers, coaxing them to share the truth about the actions of their bosses. The two reporters followed the trail of money that led to the top levels of the White House and Nixon’s campaign, slowly putting together the pieces of the scandal.

They were persistent, and they were right. As a result, they gained the trust of other sources who gave them additional information that gradually exposed the Watergate crimes to the public.

Nixon responded with an all-out assault against The Post, determined to undermine the newspaper’s credibility and weaken its finances. His aides pushed the Internal Revenue Service to investigate the tax returns of Post owner Katharine Graham and the paper’s lawyer, Edward Bennett Williams. Nixon also ordered his aides to “screw around” with the broadcasting licenses of two lucrative televisions stations owned by The Post.

And then The Post gave an administration all too happy to use dirty tricks an opening. It published the Haldeman story on Oct. 25, 1972, allowing Nixon’s staff to pounce on a small error to question publicly the paper’s credibility. Bernstein and Woodward wrote that Haldeman “was one of five high-ranking presidential associates authorized to approve payments from a secret Nixon campaign cash fund, according to federal investigators and accounts of sworn testimony before the Watergate grand jury.”

The fund had been used for sabotage and espionage against the president’s opponents, including payments to the men who burglarized the Democratic National Committee’s headquarters at the Watergate office complex, Bernstein and Woodward wrote. If Haldeman was guilty, then it was only a small step to connect the Watergate crimes to Nixon himself.

Although the main point of the story was true, Nixon’s aides jumped on the mistake: Bernstein and Woodward wrote that former Nixon campaign treasurer Hugh Sloan Jr. had testified before a grand jury about Haldeman’s control of the fund. Sloan had indeed told Bernstein and Woodward about Haldeman’s role, but he had not told the grand jury.

As Trump and his associates have done with articles about the Russia investigation, Ziegler and other Nixon spokesmen regularly denied the allegations contained in the stories of Bernstein, Woodward and other reporters. Former Post city editor Barry Sussman explained in his book, “The Great Cover-Up: Nixon and the Scandal of Watergate,” that the Haldeman story gave Nixon’s associates a specific error they could attack. Bernstein and Woodward had misinterpreted what Sloan, the former campaign treasurer, had said and had relied on the confused answers of an FBI agent to falsely conclude that Sloan had testified about Haldeman before the grand jury.

Nixon’s men used the error to disparage all of the newspaper’s Watergate reporting. At his news briefing that day, Ziegler accused The Post of engaging in “shoddy and shabby” journalism and called the article a “blatant effort at character assassination.” Clark MacGregor, director of Nixon’s reelection effort, charged that The Post was “operating in close philosophical and strategic cooperation” with the campaign of Democratic presidential candidate George McGovern.


Inhoud

Bernstein was born to a secular Jewish family [3] [4] [5] in Washington, D.C., the son of Sylvia (née Walker) and Alfred Bernstein. [6] [7] Both his parents were civil rights activists and members of the Communist Party in the 1940s. [6] [7] He attended Montgomery Blair High School in Silver Spring, Maryland, where he worked as circulation and exchange manager [8] for the school's newspaper Silver Chips. He began his journalism career at the age of 16 when he became a copyboy for The Washington Star and moved "quickly through the ranks." [2] The Ster, however, unofficially required a college degree to write for the paper. Because he had dropped out of the University of Maryland (where he was a reporter for the school's independent daily, The Diamondback [9] ) and did not intend to finish, Bernstein left in 1965 to become a full-time reporter for the Elizabeth Daily Journal in New Jersey. [10] While there, he won first prize in New Jersey's press association for investigative reporting, feature writing, and news on a deadline. [2] In 1966, Bernstein left New Jersey and began reporting for Die Washington Post, where he covered every aspect of local news and became known as one of the paper's best writing stylists. [11]

On a Saturday in June 1972, Bernstein was assigned, along with Bob Woodward, to cover a break-in at the Watergate office complex that had occurred earlier the same morning. Five burglars had been caught red-handed in the complex, where the Democratic National Committee had its headquarters one of them turned out to be an ex-CIA agent who did security work for the Republicans. In the series of stories that followed, Bernstein and Woodward eventually connected the burglars to a massive slush fund and a corrupt attorney general. Bernstein was the first to suspect that President Nixon was involved, and he found a laundered check that linked Nixon to the burglary. [12] Bernstein and Woodward's discoveries led to further investigations of Nixon, and on August 9, 1974, amid hearings by the House Judiciary Committee, Nixon resigned in order to avoid facing impeachment.

In 1974, two years after the Watergate burglary and two months before Nixon resigned, Bernstein and Woodward released the book Al die president se manne. The book drew upon the notes and research accumulated while writing articles about the scandal for the Post and "remained on best-seller lists for six months." In 1975 it was turned into a movie starring Dustin Hoffman as Bernstein and Robert Redford as Woodward which later went on to be nominated in multiple Oscar (including Best Picture nomination), Golden Globe and BAFTA categories. [13] A second book, Die Laaste Dae, was published by Bernstein and Woodward in 1976 as a follow-up chronicling Nixon's last days in office. [14]

Bernstein left the Post in 1977 and expanded into other areas due to his reputation from the Watergate reporting. He joined broadcast news in a high growth period. He worked at ABC, CNN, and CBS as a political commentator, and was a spokesman in various television commercials. [15] He began investigating the secret cooperation between the CIA and American media during the Cold War. He spent a year in his research, which was published as a 25,000-word article in Rolling Stone tydskrif. [16]

He then began working for ABC News. Between 1980 and 1984, Bernstein was the network's Washington Bureau Chief and then a senior correspondent. In 1982, for ABC's Nightline, Bernstein was the first to report [ aanhaling nodig ] during the Israeli invasion of Lebanon that Ariel Sharon had "deceived the cabinet about the real intention of the operation—to drive the Palestinians out of Lebanon, not (as he had claimed) to merely establish a 25-kilometer security zone north from the border." [ aanhaling nodig ]

Two years after leaving ABC News, Bernstein released the book Loyalties: A Son's Memoir, in which he revealed that his parents had been members of the Communist Party of America. The assertion shocked some because even J. Edgar Hoover had tried and been unable to prove that Bernstein's parents had been party members. [12]

In 1992, also for Tyd, Bernstein wrote a cover story publicizing the alliance between Pope John Paul II and President Ronald Reagan. Later, along with Vatican expert Marco Politi, he published a papal biography entitled Sy Heiligheid. Bernstein wrote in the 1996 book that the Pope's role in supporting Solidarity in his native Poland, and his geopolitical dexterity combined with enormous spiritual influence, was a principal factor in the downfall of communism in Europe. [17]

In 1992, Bernstein wrote a cover story for Die Nuwe Republiek magazine indicting modern journalism for its sensationalism and celebration of gossip over real news. The article was entitled "The Idiot Culture".

Bernstein's biography of Hillary Rodham Clinton, A Woman In Charge: The Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton, was published by Alfred A. Knopf on June 5, 2007. Knopf had a first printing of 275,000 copies. It appeared on Die New York Times Best Seller list for three weeks. [18] A CBS News end-of-year survey of publishing "hits and misses" included A Woman in Charge in the "miss" category and implied that its total sales were somewhere in the range of perhaps 55,000–65,000 copies. [19]

Bernstein is a frequent guest and analyst on television news programs, and in 2011 wrote articles for Nuusweek/Die Daily Beast, comparing Rupert Murdoch's News of the World phone-hacking scandal to Watergate. [20]

In 2012, Carl Bernstein spoke at a rally of People's Mujahedin of Iran, an opposition Iranian organization that had previously been listed as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the United States, reportedly receiving a payment for his speech. [21]

Bernstein has been married three times, first to a fellow reporter at Die Washington Post, Carol Honsa then to writer and director Nora Ephron from 1976 to 1980 and since 2003 to the former model Christine Kuehbeck.

During his marriage to Ephron, Bernstein met Margaret Jay, daughter of British Prime Minister James Callaghan and wife of Peter Jay, then UK ambassador to the United States. They had a much-publicized extramarital relationship in 1979. Margaret later became a government minister in her own right. [22] Bernstein and second wife Ephron already had an infant son, Jacob, and she was pregnant with their second son, Max, in 1979 when she learned of her husband's affair with Jay. Ephron delivered Max prematurely after finding out. [23] Ephron was inspired by the events to write the 1983 novel Heartburn, [22] which was made into a 1986 film starring Jack Nicholson and Meryl Streep.

While single, in the 1980s, Bernstein became known for dating Bianca Jagger, Martha Stewart and Elizabeth Taylor, [12] among others.

Bernstein was portrayed by Dustin Hoffman in the film version of Al die president se manne, [24] and by Bruce McCulloch in the 1999 comedy film Dick. [25]

Although they worked together to report the Watergate scandal to the world, Bernstein and Woodward had very different personalities. Raised in a traditional Republican household, Woodward was very well-educated and has been described as gentle. After graduating from Yale University, he joined the Washington Post nine months later, he was assigned the Watergate break-in story. On the other hand, Bernstein was born to a Communist Jewish family. He was rebellious, which led to him dropping out of college. He was ten months further along in his career than Woodward when the scandal broke out. [26]

They were also different in work styles. Woodward's strength was in investigation, so he focused on investigating the Watergate scandal. He met his Deep Throat source secretly to get as much information as possible. His writing was serious and matter-of-fact. However, Bernstein was the first of the pair to think that the Watergate case could be related to President Richard Nixon. Compared to Woodward, Bernstein was a strong writer, and therefore wrote articles based on Woodward's information from Deep Throat. [27] Due to their different styles, other journalists described them as a perfect team. Alicia Shepard said "Carl was the big thinker, and Woodward was the one that [made] sure it got done. [T]hey knew that each of them had strengths that the other didn't, and they relied on one another." [28]


Burglary, arrest, and limited immediate political effect

Early on June 17, 1972, police apprehended five burglars at the office of the DNC in the Watergate complex. Four of them formerly had been active in Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) activities against Fidel Castro in Cuba. (Though often referred to in the press as “Cubans,” only three of the four were of Cuban heritage.) The fifth, James W. McCord, Jr., was the security chief of the Committee to Re-elect the President (later known popularly as CREEP), which was presided over by John Mitchell, Nixon’s former attorney general. The arrest was reported in the next morning’s Washington Post in an article written by Alfred E. Lewis, Carl Bernstein, and Bob Woodward, the latter two a pair of relatively undistinguished young reporters relegated to unglamorous beats—Bernstein to roving coverage of Virginia politics and Woodward, still new to the Post, to covering minor criminal activities. Soon after, Woodward and Bernstein and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) investigators identified two coconspirators in the burglary: E. Howard Hunt, Jr., a former high-ranking CIA officer only recently appointed to the staff of the White House, and G. Gordon Liddy, a former FBI agent working as a counsel for CREEP. At the time of the break-in, Liddy had been overseeing a similar, though uncompleted, attempt to break into and surveil the headquarters of George S. McGovern, soon to become the Democratic nominee in the 1972 U.S. presidential election.

Presidential Press Secretary Ron Ziegler responded that the president would have no comment on a “third-rate burglary attempt.” The preponderance of early media reports, driven by a successful White House public relations campaign, claimed that there had been no involvement by the Nixon administration or the reelection committee. Meanwhile, the conspirators destroyed evidence, including their burglary equipment and a stash of $100 bills. Jeb Magruder, deputy director of CREEP, burned transcripts of wiretaps from an earlier break-in at the DNC’s offices. The president, his chief of staff, H.R. (Bob) Haldeman, and the special counsel to the president, Charles Colson, Nixon’s close political aide, spread alibis around Washington. Meanwhile, the White House arranged for the “disappearance” to another country of Hunt (who never actually left the United States), part of a plan for the burglars to take the fall for the crime as overzealous anticommunist patriots. On June 23, 1972, the president, through channels, ordered the FBI to tamp down its investigation. Later, this order, revealed in what became known as the Nixon tapes (Nixon’s secret recordings of his phone calls and conversations in the Oval Office), became the “smoking gun” proving that the president had been part of a criminal cover-up from the beginning.

Throughout the 1972 campaign season, Woodward and Bernstein were fed leaks by an anonymous source they referred to as “Deep Throat,” who, only some 30 years later, was revealed to be FBI deputy director W. Mark Felt, Sr. They kept up a steady stream of scoops demonstrating (1) the direct involvement of Nixon intimates in Watergate activities, (2) that the Watergate wiretapping and break-in had been financed through illegally laundered campaign contributions, and, in a blockbuster October 10 front-page article, (3) that “the Watergate bugging incident stemmed from a massive campaign of political spying and sabotage conducted on behalf of President Nixon’s re-election and directed by officials of the White House,” part of “a basic strategy of the Nixon re-election effort.”

Nevertheless, the White House successfully framed Woodward and Bernstein’s reporting as the obsession of a single “liberal” newspaper pursuing a vendetta against the president of the United States. Shortly before the election, CBS News prepared a lengthy two-part television report synthesizing the scandal’s emerging ties to the White House. However, after the first segment aired on October 27, Colson threatened CBS’s president, William Paley, and the second segment was truncated. Newspapers that were sympathetic to Nixon hardly mentioned Watergate at all. In an election eve Gallup Poll, respondents overwhelmingly said that they trusted Nixon more than Democratic candidate McGovern. Nixon was reelected in a historic landslide—winning all but Massachusetts and the District of Columbia—and embarked on what looked to be a dynamic second term.


Read the Advice Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein Gave at the White House Correspondents' Dinner

P ulitzer Prize-winning journalists Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, known for uncovering former President Richard Nixon’s involvement in the Watergate scandal, have a message for President Donald Trump &mdash the media is not fake.

The two iconic journalists offered guidance Saturday to reporters amid an increasingly bitter relationship between the Trump Administration and the press at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in Washington, D.C. The annual event was the first in decades that a president has skipped. Trump instead held a campaign-style rally in Pennsylvania to mark the 100th day of his presidency.

But while Trump was not in attendance, Woodward still spoke directly to him: “Mr. President, the media is not fake news,” he said.

The dogged duo used their experience uncovering the Watergate scandal to implore journalists to focus on their work now more than ever. “Our job is to put the best obtainable version of the truth out there, period,” he added. “Especially now.”

Read Bernstein and Woodward’s full speeches below:

Shortly after Richard Nixon resigned the presidency, Bob and I were asked a long question about reporting. We answered with a short phrase we&rsquove used many times since to describe our reporting on Watergate and its purpose and methodology: we called it the best obtainable version of the truth.

The best obtainable version of the truth.

It&rsquos a simple concept, yet something very difficult to get right because of the enormous amount of effort, thinking, persistence, pushback, logical baggage and, for sure, luck that is required, not to mention some unnatural humility.

Underlying everything reporters do in pursuit of the best obtainable version of the truth, whatever our beat or assignment, is the question &ldquowhat is news?&rdquo What is it that we believe is important, relevant, hidden, perhaps, or even in plain sight and ignored by conventional journalistic wisdom or governmental wisdom?

I&rsquod say this question of &ldquowhat is news&rdquo becomes even more relevant and essential if we are covering the president of the United States. Richard Nixon tried to make the conduct of the press the issue in Watergate, instead of the conduct of the president and his men. We tried to avoid the noise and let the reporting speak.

During our coverage of Watergate and since, Bob and I have learned a lot from one another about the business of being reporters.

Let me list here a few of the primary elements of Bernstein&rsquos repertorial education from Woodward: one, almost inevitably, unreasonable government secrecy is the enemy, and usually the giveaway about what the real story might be. And when lying is combined with secrecy, there is usually a pretty good roadmap in front of us.

Yes, follow the money, but follow, also, the lies.

Two, sources are human beings whom we need to listen to and empathize with, and understand&mdashnot objectify simply as the means to get a story. We need to go back to our sources, time and again, over and over. The best obtainable version of the truth is about context and nuance, even more than it&rsquos about simple existential facts. The development and help of &ldquoDeep Throat,&rdquo Mark Felt, as a source was a deeply human enterprise.

When we were working on our second book, Die Laaste Dae, Woodward did 17 interviews with Richard Nixon&rsquos White House lawyer. Sustained inquiry is essential. You never know what the real story is until you&rsquove done the reporting, as Woodward says, exhaustively. Gone back over and over to our sources&mdashasked ourselves and them, what&rsquos missing? What&rsquos the further explanation? What are the details? What do they think it means?

Our assumption of the big picture isn&rsquot enough. Our preconceived notions of where the story might go are almost always different than where the story comes out when we&rsquove done the reporting. I know of no important story I&rsquove worked on in more than half a century of reporting that ended up where I thought it would go when I started on it.

The people with the information we want should not be pigeonholed or prejudged by their ideology or their politics&mdashalmost all of our sources in Watergate were people who had, at one time or another, been committed to Richard Nixon and his presidency.

Incremental reporting is essential.

We wrote more than 300 stories in Watergate. Whenever I&rsquod say &ldquolet&rsquos go for the big picture, the whole enchilada&rdquo or whatever, Bob would say, &ldquohere&rsquos what we know now, and are ready to put in the paper.&rdquo

And then, inevitably, one story led to another and another, and the larger talk expanded because of this reportorial dynamic. The best obtainable version of the truth became repeatedly clearer, more developed and understandable.

We&rsquore reporters&mdashnot judges, not legislators. What government or citizens or judges do with the information we&rsquove developed is not part of our process, or our objective. Our job is to put the best obtainable version of the truth out there, period.

Especially now.

BOB WOODWARD:

I am honored to be standing here with Carl, who has over the decades taught me so much about journalism. As he said, reporting is about human connections&mdashfinding the people who know what is hidden and establishing relationships of trust.

That was the first lesson, from Carl, in 1972. He obtained a list of people who had worked at Nixon&rsquos reelection campaign committee. Not surprisingly, from a former girlfriend.

He&rsquos finally embarrassed.

No one would talk. Carl said, &ldquohere&rsquos what we have to do&rdquo&mdashlaunching the system of going to the homes of people, knocking on doors when we had no appointment. We later wrote, &ldquothe nighttime visits were, frankly, fishing expeditions.&rdquo The trick was getting inside someone&rsquos apartment or house. Bits and pieces came we saw fear, at times. We heard about document destruction, a massive house-cleaning at the Nixon reelection committee, a money trail, an organized, well-funded coverup.

Clark MacGregor, then the Nixon campaign manager, called Ben Bradlee, the editor of the Washington Post, to complain., MacGregor reported, &ldquothey knock on doors late at night and telephone from the lobby. They hounded five women!&rdquo

Bradlee&rsquos response: &ldquoThat&rsquos the nicest thing I&rsquove heard about them in years!&rdquo

And he meant, maybe ever.

In 1973, I recall standing on Pennsylvania Avenue with Carl after a court hearing. We watched three of the Watergate burglars and their lawyer filling a cab, front and back seats. Carl was desperate&mdashdesperate that he would lose them and this opportunity., He was short on cash and didn&rsquot know where he might be going. I gave Carl twenty dollars.

There was no room in the cab, but Carl, uninvited, got in anyway, piling in on top of these people as the door slammed. He ended up flying with the lawyer to New York City and came back with another piece of the puzzle.

I never got my $20.

The point: very aggressive reporting is often necessary. Bradlee and the editors of the Washington Post gave us the precious luxury of time to pursue all leads, all people who might know something&mdasheven something small.,

Now, in 2017, the impatience and speed of the internet and our own rush can disable and undermine the most important tool of journalism: that method that luxury of time to inquire, to pursue, to find the real agents of genuine news, witnesses, participants, documents, into the cab.

Any president and his administration in Washington is clearly entitled to the most serious reporting efforts possible. We need to understand, to listen, to dig. Obviously, our reporting needs to get both facts and tone right. The press, especially the so-called mainstream media, comes under regular attack, particularly during presidential campaigns like this one, and its aftermath.

Like politicians and presidents, sometimes, perhaps too frequently, we make mistakes and go too far. When that happens, we should own up to it. But the effort today to get this best obtainable version of the truth is largely made in good faith.

Mr. President, the media is not fake news.

Let&rsquos take that off the table as we proceed.

As Marty Baron, the executive editor of the Post, said in recent speeches, reporters should display modesty and humility, bending over backwards and sincerely, not only to be fair but to demonstrate to people we cover that we intend and will be fair.

In other words, that we have an obligation to listen.

At the same time, Marty said, &ldquowhen we have done our job thoroughly, we have a duty to tell people what we&rsquove learned, and to tell it to them forthrightly, without masking our findings or muddling them.&rdquo

Journalists should not have a dog in the political fight except to find that best obtainable version of the truth. The indispensable centrality of fact-based reporting is careful, scrupulous listening and an open mind.

President Nixon once said the problem with journalists is that they look in the mirror when they should be looking out the window. That is certainly one thing that Nixon said that Carl and I agree with.

Whatever the climate, whether the media&rsquos revered or reviled, we should and must persist, and, I believe, we will.

We also need to face the reality that polling numbers should that most Americans disapprove of and distrust the media. This is no time for self-satisfaction or smugness. But as Ben Bradlee said in 1997, twenty years ago, &ldquothe most aggressive our search for truth, the more some people are offended by the press. So be it.&rdquo

Ben continued: &ldquoI take great strange knowing that in my experience, the truth does emerge. It takes forever sometimes, but it does emerge, and that any relaxation by the press will be extremely costly to democracy.&rdquo

Carl and I are grandfathers, perhaps great-grandfathers in American journalism, but we can see that the three journalists that we are recognizing tonight are some of the finest examples of that craft of persistence.


All the President's Men

In what must be the most devastating political detective story of the century, two young Washington Post reporters whose brilliant investigative journalism smashed the Watergate scandal wide open tell the whole behind-the-scenes drama the way it really happened.

The story begins with a burglary at Democratic National Committee headquarters on June 17, 1972. Bob Woodward, who was then working on the Washington Post's District of Columbia staff, was called into the office on a Saturday morning to cover the story. Carl Bernstein, a Virginia political reporter on the Post, was also assigned. The two men soon learned that this was not a simple burglary.

Following lead after lead, Woodward and Bernstein picked up a trail of money, secrecy and high-level pressure that led to the Oval Office and implicated the men closest to Richard Nixon and then the President himself. Over the months, Woodward met secretly with Deep Throat, now perhaps America's most famous still-anonymous source.

Here is the amazing story. From the first suspicions through the tortuous days of reporting and finally getting people to talk, the journalists were able to put the pieces of the puzzle together and produce the stories that won the Post a Pulitzer Prize. Al die president se manne is the inside story of how Bernstein and Woodward broke the story that brought about the President's downfall. This is the reporting that changed the American presidency.


After 30 years, the scoop on Woodward and Bernstein

THIS year marks the 30th anniversary of the movie “All the President’s Men,” starring Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman as investigative reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, respectively. The movie made Woodward and Bernstein forever famous and has become a classic. It still runs on television, is played widely in journalism schools and often is used as shorthand in high schools to teach about one of the most corrupt times in U.S. politics.

Although the movie is the result of Redford’s determination to get it made as the Watergate story unfolded, its authenticity and endurance have everything to do with its director, Alan J. Pakula, who morphed into a Sigmund Freud with notepad before any camera rolled. His detailed notes, first made public in December 2005, were donated by his wife to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences after his death in 1998 in an automobile accident. They show how Pakula came to view his protagonists.

In January 1975, five months after President Nixon had resigned, Pakula flew to Washington to begin in-depth interviews with a dozen of the principals involved in unraveling the Watergate tale. He sat down with Woodward, then 32, Bernstein, then 31, their editors, their friends and the two women at the center of the reporters’ lives. Woodward had married reporter Francie Barnard, and Bernstein was dating Nora Ephron, whom he married on April 14, 1976 -- 10 days after the movie debuted in Washington.

Pakula didn’t want facts alone. He wanted to understand Woodward and Bernstein deeply so he could capture their true characters and motivations for the movie. Ben Bradlee, editor of the Washington Post during Watergate, told me that Pakula spent “so much time with each of us. He knew all about my mother, brother -- everything.” (Jason Robards, who played Bradlee, is on screen only 10 minutes.)

During Watergate, no matter how well Bernstein reported the story, he was pegged by Post editors as the “bad boy” of the duo -- always late, unreliable and quick to hype his leads. In her interview with Pakula, Ephron tried to rehabilitate her boyfriend’s reputation. She said Bernstein was driven to uncover the Watergate story because he wanted to prove everyone at the Post wrong. He was not lazy, she insisted. He just had a “psychosis” about being controlled by authority figures.

The notes from Pakula’s interview with Ephron reveal a key to his understanding of Woodward and Bernstein. “Underneath all the arguments and fights -- way down, they hated each other,” Pakula wrote. “The qualities that each other had -- the qualities that they needed [to report Watergate] -- they didn’t like. Bob’s sucking up to people. Carl knew he needed [that quality] but despised it in Bob. Bob needed Carl because Carl was pushy. Bob can formulate and Carl can draw conclusions.”

One story that Ephron shared with Pakula concerned how the two reporters sparred as they raced to complete the book “All the President’s Men.” Woodward, she told the director, could be “so stubborn and bullheaded” and had “no instinct for writing.” When Ephron and Bernstein were in Martinique on vacation, Woodward and Bernstein fought on the telephone, to the tune of a $400 bill, about verb tenses.

Pakula’s notes, dated May 2, 1975, indicate that he’d concluded this about the two reporters:

* Bob thought Carl was “hype, no follow-through. All talk. Bull---- artist. Irresponsible.”

* Carl saw Bob as “a machine. He’s a reporter doll. Give him a story, any story, and he runs with it. A drone. No humor. No surprises. All stability. Witbrood. Mr. Perfect. No soul.”

Pakula gradually realized that neither Woodward nor Bernstein could have pulled off Watergate alone. Despite their stark differences, they needed each another. Each had strengths that complemented the other’s.

“Bernstein could be right intuitively -- but dangerous left to himself,” Pakula wrote in his notes. “Woodward cautiously would have to go from one step literally to another. And yet it was Bernstein’s daring that was necessary.”

But in his interview with Woodward, Pakula discovered that the reporter could surprise: Other people’s secrets fascinated and obsessed him. Although Woodward was reluctant to talk about himself as a reporter, he was determined to expose other people’s secrets. The dichotomy intrigued Pakula.

But as Pakula began to understand Woodward, he wondered if the charming, handsome Redford, then 39, could play someone so different from himself. Woodward moved logically. His unfounded fear of being fired and his need to belong fueled his workaholic lifestyle.

Pakula wrote that Redford would have to “scrap his charm. It’s that square, straight, intense, decent quality of Woodward’s that works. Redford can get that compulsive drive. Can he get the hurt and vulnerability?”

Throughout filming in 1975, if there was a question on how Woodward or Bernstein might react, Redford or Hoffman or Pakula called either man. “It was the first film I ever made like this,” Hoffman told me. 'Ons het aanhou probeer om vas te hou aan die egtheid van wat gebeur het deur amper daagliks met hulle te praat.

Wanneer hulle kon, het Woodward en Bernstein die stelle besoek. Een middernag in Junie 1975 kyk Bernstein toe Pakula 'n toneel regisseer. Hoffman hardloop in 'n leë straat en jaag agter Redford se grys Volvo aan toe hy uit die Post -parkeerterrein trek. Hy het geskreeu: “Stop! . Woodward! Stop! ”

Bernstein onthou in 'n onderhoud van 1975, nou in Pakula se argief, dat 'groot menigtes buite was. Ek kom daar net toe Hoffman uit die gebou breek. Dit was een van die ongelooflikste gevoelens wat ek in my lewe gehad het, want dit is lankal sedert ons aan die storie begin werk het, en ek het nie presies geweet wie ek was of wie hy was nie was-eksistensieel, dit was 'n totale verstand ----. Hy het die maniere gehad. U is nie gewoond daaraan om u optrede te sien nie. Tog het ek geweet dat hy reg was. ”

Terwyl Hoffman hardloop, het Bernstein, wat reeds 'n beroemdheid was, verstaan ​​hoeveel gebeur het in die drie jaar sedert vyf inbrekers by die Demokratiese Party se hoofkwartier by die Watergate -hotel ingebreek het.

'Ek is nie meer so nie,' het Bernstein in die onderhoud gesê. 'Dit het lankal gebeur. Sou ek weer so hardloop? ”