During Watergate Scandal
<<Author>>
<<Date>>
During Watergate Scandal
Step1. The two editorial articles about President Nixon and the Watergate scandal are really contradictory. The Washington Post article is a more scathing account and revelation of the corruption that occurred during the scandal. It is highly critical of the Presidency and almost implicates Nixon in the scandal and doubts his actions to build credibility in his government (Washington Post, 1973). The article doubts the intentions of the President and is accusative, in terms of the way the President seeks to turn over the investigation to the courts, without affixing any direct responsibility on high level staff in his office. It also mentions and reiterates the fact that public confidence needs to be restored, by fixing accountability on people in high office who display criminal behavior. It is critical of the President’s lack of adequate action and accuses him of having done the bare minimum to escape his way out of the crisis. Although the article welcomes some actions taken by the President, it does not have a fair and objective view about the appointment of Defense Secretary Elliot Richardson to be Attorney General and a prosecutor in the Watergate scandal. It doubts the intentions of these actions and the fairness of such investigations; and suggests the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate criminality in the scandal. It doubts the integrity of the President and government in all the actions pertaining to the scandal. The article in ‘The Harvard Crimson’, on the other hand is very defensive and overly supportive of the President. It is highly critical of the moral ground argument of the editors from ‘The Chicago Tribune’ and their call for the President’s resignation. Readers of this article will believe that the role and authority of the President is beyond question. The scandal needs to be viewed as a small part of a larger canvas of Presidential duties and that the scandal was a minor aberration in the overall context of how government and presidency needs to function. It criticizes the original article by mentioning that, “Chicago Tribune's editorial decision is based on about 33 hours of conversation, part of an estimated 15,000 hours of presidential deliberation on foreign and domestic policy as well as hundreds of other topics affecting the lives of Americans (Burch 1974). It urges the reader to consider the tough role the President needs to play and extols many of Nixon’s achievements and virtues. It is too supportive of the President, given the nature of the scandal and does not provide the readers with a fair and balanced opinion, just like the Washington Post article.
Step 2. The Watergate scandal was a pivotal moment in the history of America. The scandal had a deep impact on how Americans felt about their politicians and the political system. It destroyed the moral fabric that justified the actions of government and the presidency. The credibility of politicians came into question and many potential leaders did not want to join politics (Finney, 2012). Americans no longer believed in their politicians or government and this distrust in the system was all pervasive, across the nation. Before the scandal, people on various sides of the political arena, argued and discussed on political issues but their integrity and honesty were never in question. The scandal, and its aftermath, changed that view and Americans became more skeptical of government and politicians. The scandal became the most talked about topic in media, to the extent that the suffix ‘gate’ became a globally accepted term for all corruption and scandals. Because of the Washington Post articles by Woodward and Bernstein, the scandal became a great example of investigative reporting. The way media looked and analyzed politicians, changed forever (Finney, 2012). According to Zelizer, “Each revelation gave voters another reason not to trust their elected officials and to believe the worst arguments that people made about government (2014). The scandal has irreversibly changed the political commentary and discourse in media and reflects people’s distrust in the system.
Step 3.The Watergate scandal was a real turning point, not only in terms of the negative consequences related to trust and integrity in government, but also in terms of new reforms which came into play. Another key aspect was the emergence of investigative reporting in the media as an effective tool to unearth wrong doings in government and influence people. However, the objectivity of some of the coverage in media, begs to be questioned. The efforts of the media in unearthing the scandal cannot be overestimated.
Smart phones and social media would have really changed the course of the scandal. The media landscape today has undergone a huge change. The advent of social media and the digital generation has ensured that information moves very quickly and becomes viral in no time. Social media can influence the opinions of millions of people globally within minutes. The widespread use of smart phones by youth across the globe has helped in promoting new thoughts and innovative ideas, quickly. The Watergate scandal had its roots in criminality and cover-ups. In today’s world, the scandal would have been exposed more quickly and easily. Many facts of the case would have been unearthed quickly. The arguments in favor and against the President would have been discussed widely on media like Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn. Media and political scholars would have had the opportunity to profess their views on the scandal openly. More Americans would have been exposed to the stories and discourse about the scandal in real time, helping them form independent, educated opinions, about the role of the President; instead of non-objective, biased opinions, printed by mass media. Social media platforms would have also given an opportunity to President Nixon and all his officials to comment openly on their views about the scandal, giving them an opportunity to present their side of the story. One cannot help but wonder if the tenure of President Nixon would have continued, due to a wave of favorable public opinion, on social media.
References
Burch, D., (1973). In Defence of Richard Nixon. The Harvard Crimson. Retrieved from: http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1974/5/14/in-defense-of-richard-nixon-pithe/?page=1
Finney, D., (2012). Watergate Scandal changed the Political Landscape Forever.
USA Today. Retrieved from: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-06-16/watergate-scandal-changed-political-landscape/55639974/1
Washington Post. (1973). Watergate: The Unfinished Business. WashingtonPost.
Retrieved from: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
srv/national/longterm/watergate/articles/050173-2.htm
Zelizer, J., (2014). Distrustful Americans still live in age of Watergate. CNN. Retrieved from:
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/07/07/opinion/zelizer-watergate-politics/
