subscribe to this page
"The President in 1971." The New York Times 02 Jan. 1972, sec. E10. ProQuest. 05 Apr. 2008
In the latter stages of 1973, the American public’s confidence in the federal government was quickly fading. President Nixon would not resign for nearly another year, yet many were already calling for him to step down. Confidence in Nixon had quickly fallen due to public sentiment regarding the Vietnam War and suspicion of the Watergate Scandal. It was said that the bombings of Laos and Cambodia were clear evidence of Nixon’s, “scant regard for the authority of Cong and for the will of the people.” The people had lost much faith and trust in the man who was meant to lead them through the toughest of times in the Pacific. His lack of leadership and ability to gain the backing of the American people meant that Americans were looking for a stabilizing force.
As the war worsened and the anti-war movement hit its peak in the middle of the war, the American public lacked a true role model to look to for confidence. At this time, negative sentiment towards the government and the rebellious actions of the anti-war movement, left the country in search for someone or something to instill their faith in. While venturing to the theatre in 1972, moviegoers were introduced to Don Corleone who was both a respected, prominent businessman and a benevolent father. Not only did the Don’s extended family outwardly display its tremendous faith and confidence in him, but even rival mafia families such as the Barzini’s valued his word and leadership. For many viewers, Vito Corleone was so attractive because in many ways he represented the antithesis of the public’s view of Nixon in 1972. While Nixon had promised that the troops were going to come home safely, the Don was a highly principled man who never betrayed his own word. In response to how he completed a transaction, The Godfather responds, “I made him an offer he couldn’t refuse.” In such a powerful statement the viewer never has a doubt that he will follow through on his guarantee. Likewise, while many Americans saw the United States and Nixon as the aggressor in waging an unjustified war against Vietnam, the Corleone family was the initiator in calling a peace conference with all the prominent mafia families in order to rid of inter-family hostility. The audience’s ability to confide in the leadership of Vito Corleone, attracted viewers to the theatre and furthered the movie’s cultural impact.
belongs to The Godfather: A Cultural Phenomenon project
tagged nixon richard vietnam_war the_godfather
by ammark
...on 10-APR-08
The Washington Post site dedicated to the film. Includes links to other sites with information about Watergate and the film, as well as the original news story by Woodward and Bernstein.
belongs to All the President's Men (1976) project
tagged US_History film nixon washingon_post watergate scandal journalism carl_bernstein all_the_presidents_men bob_woodward
by jmklein
...on 02-APR-06
Strober, Deborah H. (Deborah Hart), 1940- . Nixon presidency : an oral history of the era / Deborah Hart Strober and Gerald S. Strober. [1574885820 (acid-free paper) ] Washington, D.C. : Brassey's, c2003.
Call#: Van Pelt Library E856 .S76 2003
Call#: Van Pelt Library E856 .S76 2003
The Nixon Presidency: An Oral History is a comprehensive work compiling oral accounts of different aspects of Nixon’s term as president and its aftermath. Chapter 29 is a collection of interviews about the Media’s Role in Nixon’s Downfall. A variety of people with different levels of involvement in the Nixon administration comment on the role of Woodward and Bernstein. Gerald Warren states that Woodward and Bernstein’s coverage of Watergate caused journalism to “lose its purity” because of their “reprehensible” tactics. He believes that the journalists operated on the assumption that the ends justified the means, and that journalistic integrity could be compromised to ultimately bring Nixon down. Raymond Price calls Woodward and Bernstein “totally dishonest reporters.” Bob Woodward responds by defending the veridicality of his account. William Rusher argues that Woodward and Bernstein did not break the Watergate scandal, and that they do not deserve the credit they have received. Seymour Glanzer is of the opinion that “all Woodward and Bernstein did was to follow in the wake of the investigation; they didn’t do any pioneering work.”
All of the people interviewed, other than Woodward of course, agree that the role that Woodward and Bernstein played has been overemphasized and that, other than maintaining public interest in the scandal, they were not integral in allowing the event to play out as it did. However, many more people can recall the names Woodward and Bernstein than names that some of the interviewees cite as important players, such as John J. Sirica, the U.S. District Court judge who presided over Watergate-related trials. This can be accounted for by the fact that the story of the Washington Post investigation, as told in the book and the movie All the President’s Men, glamorizes the journalists and journalism in general, and it dramatizes the story with the mysterious portrayal of Deep Throat and the shadowy scenery of Washington D.C.
All of the people interviewed, other than Woodward of course, agree that the role that Woodward and Bernstein played has been overemphasized and that, other than maintaining public interest in the scandal, they were not integral in allowing the event to play out as it did. However, many more people can recall the names Woodward and Bernstein than names that some of the interviewees cite as important players, such as John J. Sirica, the U.S. District Court judge who presided over Watergate-related trials. This can be accounted for by the fact that the story of the Washington Post investigation, as told in the book and the movie All the President’s Men, glamorizes the journalists and journalism in general, and it dramatizes the story with the mysterious portrayal of Deep Throat and the shadowy scenery of Washington D.C.
belongs to All the President's Men (1976) project
tagged US_History bob_woodward journalism carl_bernstein washingon_post watergate scandal nixon
by jmklein
...on 02-APR-06
An Annotated Bibliography of the film for FILM101 with Peter Decherney, Spring 2006.
Researched and written by Jennifer Klein.
tagged all_the_presidents_men washingon_post watergate nixon bob_woodward film historical_film hollywood carl_bernstein
by jmklein
...on 01-APR-06
Lang, Gladys Engel..
Battle for public opinion : the president, the press, and the polls during Watergate / Gladys Engel Lang and Kurt Lang. [023105548X] New York : Columbia University Press, 1983.
Call#: [z] Lost copy. E860 .L36 1983
Call#: [z] Lost copy. E860 .L36 1983
There have been many long term effects of Watergate. The event has altered perceptions of the presidency and the media. Watergate has become a symbol that has determined public attitudes and behaviors. Chapter 10: Continuity and Change deals with this issue. The authors discuss the public image of Watergate that has evolved over time, resulting from “a pooling of ideas that are then reaffirmed by the media.” This image is not always reflective of what really happened. Memory of the event makes the story into a legend instead of history.
The authors argue that one of the most important aspects of the story that has become a part of the legend is the role of the media. Watergate taught the country a lesson about the importance of a free press – the legend tells us that the Watergate cover-up never would have been revealed if not for the press. The Watergate legend also remembers journalists as heroes, which the authors state is hardly ever accurate. The movie All the President’s Men, as well as the book of the same name, contributes to this aspect of the country’s collective memory. The authors believe that an overblown image of newspapermen is dangerous because members of the press can become conspiracy theorists in hopes of cracking a non-existent ring of corruption and “exposing wrongdoing.” Making moral judgments and being a government watchdog, Lang & Lang argue, are not a reporter’s job.
The authors credit Bernstein and Woodward with doing a good job at investigating Watergate. Publicity through the press did prevent Nixon from regaining public support and from thwarting attempts to persecute his crimes, and press kept the issue alive in the mind of the public. However, they point out that there were many other people involved, and that the journalists only played a small roll. The press depended on information from official bodies such as the Senate Watergate Committee, the Special Watergate Prosecution Force, and the House Judiciary Committee. Yet, Bernstein and Woodward are still the first (and often only) names that come to mind as the “good guys” of Watergate. Lang & Lang explain, “ since the facts are so quickly forgotten, the folklore is what survives.”
The authors argue that one of the most important aspects of the story that has become a part of the legend is the role of the media. Watergate taught the country a lesson about the importance of a free press – the legend tells us that the Watergate cover-up never would have been revealed if not for the press. The Watergate legend also remembers journalists as heroes, which the authors state is hardly ever accurate. The movie All the President’s Men, as well as the book of the same name, contributes to this aspect of the country’s collective memory. The authors believe that an overblown image of newspapermen is dangerous because members of the press can become conspiracy theorists in hopes of cracking a non-existent ring of corruption and “exposing wrongdoing.” Making moral judgments and being a government watchdog, Lang & Lang argue, are not a reporter’s job.
The authors credit Bernstein and Woodward with doing a good job at investigating Watergate. Publicity through the press did prevent Nixon from regaining public support and from thwarting attempts to persecute his crimes, and press kept the issue alive in the mind of the public. However, they point out that there were many other people involved, and that the journalists only played a small roll. The press depended on information from official bodies such as the Senate Watergate Committee, the Special Watergate Prosecution Force, and the House Judiciary Committee. Yet, Bernstein and Woodward are still the first (and often only) names that come to mind as the “good guys” of Watergate. Lang & Lang explain, “ since the facts are so quickly forgotten, the folklore is what survives.”
belongs to All the President's Men (1976) project
tagged bob_woodward carl_bernstein journalism collective_memory scandal watergate nixon
by jmklein
...on 01-APR-06
Hollywood's White House : the American presidency in film and history / edited by Peter C. Rollins and John E. O'Connor. [0813122708 (Cloth : alk. paper) ] Lexington : University Press of Kentucky, c2003.
Call#: Van Pelt Library PN1995.9.U64 H65 2003
Call#: Van Pelt Library PN1995.9.U64 H65 2003
The chapter on The Transformed Presidency: The Real Presidency and Hollywood’s Reel Presidency studies the transformation that the job and the image of commander-in-chief has undergone. Levine spends a few pages discussing the transformation of the presidency in reality. A major change between the terms of Franklin D. Roosevelt and the present has occurred in the relationship of the president and the press. FDR was the first president to appoint a press secretary; today there are a slew of assistants, liaisons, writers, and spokespersons who, on many occasions, deal with the press in place of the president himself. All the President’s Men is a “testament to the change in White House-press relations,” Levine states. By attributing the “cracking” of the Watergate scandal to two journalists, the film inspired a new generation of investigative reporting. One reason that Woodward and Bernstein appear so heroic in the film is because they persist “despite the lies and the disinformation fed by the official White House press machine.” By the time Nixon was in office, the post of press secretary had evolved into a fleet of employees comprising a “press machine.”
Like Cameron, Sorlin, and Toplin, Myron Levine brings up the fact that the film belittles the contributions of people other than Woodward and Bernstein to bringing some members of the Nixon administration to justice. However, Levine states, Woodward and Bernstein played an extremely important role in maintaining pressure on other investigators and government bodies to act against corruption. The author also points out that the editor of the Washington Post, Benjamin Bradlee (portrayed in the film by Jason Robards) was extremely careful about publishing only substantiated allegations. Levine believes that this journalistic standard has also changed over time. He finds it unfortunate that, as a result of the near instantaneous speed with which news gets to today’s readers, media outlets no longer seem concerned with confirming the facts before print. Ultimately, All the President’s Men reflects the backlash against the modern White House’s attempt to strictly control the flow of information about the president and his administration.
Like Cameron, Sorlin, and Toplin, Myron Levine brings up the fact that the film belittles the contributions of people other than Woodward and Bernstein to bringing some members of the Nixon administration to justice. However, Levine states, Woodward and Bernstein played an extremely important role in maintaining pressure on other investigators and government bodies to act against corruption. The author also points out that the editor of the Washington Post, Benjamin Bradlee (portrayed in the film by Jason Robards) was extremely careful about publishing only substantiated allegations. Levine believes that this journalistic standard has also changed over time. He finds it unfortunate that, as a result of the near instantaneous speed with which news gets to today’s readers, media outlets no longer seem concerned with confirming the facts before print. Ultimately, All the President’s Men reflects the backlash against the modern White House’s attempt to strictly control the flow of information about the president and his administration.
belongs to All the President's Men (1976) project
tagged Benjamin_Bradlee hollywood nixon watergate washingon_post scandal journalism film all_the_presidents_men bob_woodward carl_bernstein
by jmklein
...on 27-MAR-06
Toplin, Robert Brent, 1940-. History by Hollywood : the use and abuse of the American past / Robert Brent Toplin. [0252020731 (cloth : alk. paper)] Urbana : University of Illinois Press, c1996.
Call#: Van Pelt Library PN1995.9.H5 T66 1996
Call#: Van Pelt Library PN1995.9.H5 T66 1996
In part 4 of his book, Robert Toplin discusses movies that celebrate “the ‘Great Man’ in the Documentary Style.” He uses All the President’s Men as one of two main examples. He argues that although the movie generally maintains a commitment to authenticity, it overemphasizes the role that Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein played in cracking the Watergate scandal. Focusing on the personal experiences of these two journalists helped the filmmakers minimize complexity in an already intricate story. He also mentions that the movie's documentary feel is obtained through attention to detail and the strategy of withholding information from the audience.
For the film to be interesting to the audience, it had to depict the every day tasks of the characters, phone calls, note taking, and staff meetings, as exciting and dramatic. The director, Alan J. Pakula, portrayed “typewriters, pencils, pads…as important weapons that could bring down some of the most powerful men in the country.” The movie begins with an close shot of a typewriter; each key stroke sends out “cannon shots, suggesting the power of the press in exposing assaults on freedom.” This strategy served to glorify both journalism and the protagonists. Many people other than Woodward and Bernstein were involved with bringing down the conspiracy, but the movie elevated these two journalists to the roles of primary and practically sole players in most people’s memory of this historical event. Toplin ultimately excuses the glorification of Woodward and Bernstein as a common tendency of docudrama, and he credits the film as “a bold an informed view of a significant crisis in American political life.”
For the film to be interesting to the audience, it had to depict the every day tasks of the characters, phone calls, note taking, and staff meetings, as exciting and dramatic. The director, Alan J. Pakula, portrayed “typewriters, pencils, pads…as important weapons that could bring down some of the most powerful men in the country.” The movie begins with an close shot of a typewriter; each key stroke sends out “cannon shots, suggesting the power of the press in exposing assaults on freedom.” This strategy served to glorify both journalism and the protagonists. Many people other than Woodward and Bernstein were involved with bringing down the conspiracy, but the movie elevated these two journalists to the roles of primary and practically sole players in most people’s memory of this historical event. Toplin ultimately excuses the glorification of Woodward and Bernstein as a common tendency of docudrama, and he credits the film as “a bold an informed view of a significant crisis in American political life.”
belongs to All the President's Men (1976) project
tagged all_the_presidents_men bob_woodward carl_bernstein film journalism nixon scandal us_history washingon_post watergate
by jmklein
...on 23-MAR-06