1

Watergate Scandal Reassessed:

Mass Media’s Watchdog Role and Its Impact on American Political System

Salieg Luki Munestri, SS, MA

(International Relations Department, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, UNS)

(Researcher at Pusat Studi Bangsa-Bangsa Melayu, UNS)

Abstract

Having successful first term, President Nixon and his advisers worried about reelection. They

organized strategy to win the 1972 reelection. The tactics he constructed brought him to get

involved in the one of the biggest US constitutional crises, the Watergate Scandal. Bob

Woodward and Carl Bernstein performed media muckraking concerning the issue. This led to the

final judgment, his presidential impeachment in 1974. Forty years after President Nixon‟s

resignation, there remain questions on how important was the role of journalism in bringing him

down and how have journalism and politics changed after the scandal. Undeniably the case has

brought significant impacts on journalism and how journalists work today. This paper aims to

reassess the scandal and provide the impacts on media and journalism and public‟s perception of

American government which play part in defining the U.S. political system. Finally the author

calls for the United Nation to encourage initiatives to strengthen the capacity building of

investigative journalism throughout the world.

Keywords: President Nixon, the Watergate Scandal, impeachment, journalism, Bob Woodward

and Carl Bernstein, media muckraking, the U.S. political system, investigative

journalism

Introduction

On June 17, 1972, five men; Bernard Barker, Virgillo Gonzalez, Eugenio Martinez,

James McCord, and Frank Sturgis, were arrested at 2:30 A.M. in a burglary at Democratic

headquarters, carrying photographic equipment and electronic gear. The burglars had not broken

into the small local Democratic Party office but the headquarters of the Democratic National

Committee in the Watergate office-apartment-hotel complex.

The case, as so called Watergate Case, interested Washington Post to have investigative

reports on the case since although there were still too many unknown factors about the break-in

to make it a story. There was no immediate explanation to why the five suspects would want to

bug the democratic National Committee offices, and whether or not they were working for any

other individuals or organizations. Some questions aroused among American society. Two

2

reporters of Washington Post, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, took the challenge to conduct

investigative reports concerning Watergate. They started to collect the puzzles from James

McCord whom on June 18, 1972 the Associated Press made it embarrassingly clear that James

McCord was the security coordinator of the Committee for the Re-Election of the President

(CREEP). They found that John Mitchel, the campaign director of the CREEP, was an individual

behind the case, and this led to the next very complicated investigation as the Watergate involved

almost all President Nixon‟s men. The two reporters tried to get any single information,

indication, and clue from all the members of the Committee, many of whom refused to give

comment but nervousness. They get many clues leading to the spot of the problem by a secret

man called Deep Throat, whom Bob Woodward often met in a basement parking area secretly at

2 A.M. Only Woodward and Bernstein know precisely Deep Throat‟s identity.

Woodward and Bernstein got puzzled with the incomplete information. They collected

any single part of it and arranged it, thus, resulted in a shocking fact that led their investigation to

some political scandals such as purchasing voters which was called “rat fucking”, corruptions,

and other conspiracy behind President‟s Nixon reelection on November 11, 1972. Felt

challenged for further answer, they continued their investigative journalism and the final answer

was the House of Judiciary Committee voted to officially charge Nixon with misconduct and to

impeach him. The Committee charged him with hindering the process of the court by cover-up,

misusing federal agencies to violate the citizen‟s rights, and refusing to comply with the

Congress demand to deliver the tapes and other materials related to the break-in. President Nixon

announced his resignation in 1974; “I have never been a quitter. To leave office before my term

is completed is opposed to every instinct in my body. But as president I must put the interests of

America first. Therefore, I shall resign the Presidency effective at noon tomorrow. Vice

President Ford will be sworn in as President at that hour in this office.” 1 Vice President Gerald

R. Ford took the oath as the new President the following day to complete the remaining two and

a half years of Nixon‟s administration.

The following part of the paper respectively brings understanding concerning Nixon, his

administration and his interconnection with Watergate. It elaborates the case and how it could

force Nixon to end his administration. The next part investigates the media muckraking and the

1 President Nixon Resignation Address, in

http://www.presidentialrhetoric.com/historicspeeches/nixon/resignation.html, retrieved on August 27, 2014

3

impact of the scandal on today‟s journalism and its relations with politics, particularly in the

United States.

Nixon and Watergate Scandal

Watergate scandal began when President Richard Nixon and his people in his

administration tried to cover up his involvement in the break-in Democratic National Committee

headquarters. Although the scandal began with burglary, many believed that the case was rooted

from the atmosphere Nixon and his advisers had built in the White House. President Nixon

worked so hard to become the president of the United States. His winning brought him so

defensive, secretive, and even offended against any critics. He was often recognized for his

paranoia. He trusted no one and believed that everyone was attempting to bring him down. He

was always so suspicious of those around him that he created a secret intelligence team to

investigate any daily activities he thought untrustworthy. He was always worried that his abuse

of power was revealed.

Moreover, Nixon started his presidency when the condition of the American society was

in turmoil. Riots, chaos and protests over the Vietnam War were escalating, consuming the

country. These protesters and other radicals were believed to endanger his administration and

were always trying to topple him down. Moreover, the Vietnam War played a role in shaping the

public negative feeling about the government. His paranoia made him form the “plumbers”2 to

prevent information about the war from leaking to the press. His secret bombing campaign in

Cambodia, Operation Breakfast,3 unavoidably helped shape the public perception that his

administration did not represent the best interests of the public. Nixon‟s interwoven crimes

redoubled his paranoia, thus, he ordered a cover-up. He, even, compiled an „enemies list‟,

consisting of his political opponents and any people he considered potential threat to his

presidency.

2 "White House Plumbers" was a secret unit tasked with digging up dirt on Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsberg.

The Plumbers went on to commit crimes for the Committee for the Re-Election of the President, including the

Watergate burglaries.

http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2071839_2071844_2071846,00.html, retrieved on

September 15, 2014 3 "Operation Breakfast" was the first course in a four-year bombing campaign that drew Cambodia headlong into the

Vietnam War. The Nixon Administration kept the bombings secret from Congress for several months.

http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/cambodia/tl02.html, retrieved on September 10, 2014

4

In 1972 President Nixon began his re-election campaign, organized by a special

committee, the Committee to Re-Elect the President (CREEP).4 His reelection was uncertain. His

sole challenger, South Dakota Senator George McGovern was seen too liberal. Nevertheless,

anti-war movement still raged, bringing negativity to his reelection. Ambitioned to be re-elected

at all cost, Nixon and his people started to investigate and gather information concerning their

Democratic opponents. Furthermore, they began spying, digging information and spreading

rumors and false reports of the opponent to gain more public support. As an effort to

support the president, five persons were instructed to break into the Democratic Party

headquarters at the Watergate complex and to steal any campaign-related file. They also placed

wiretaps on the office telephones to get as many campaign information as possible. One of the

burglars was uncovered to be an ex-CIA and also a member of CREEP. Some reports revealed

that the burglars were secretly paid by CREEP fund controlled by the White House.

During the investigation process, the President ordered a cover-up, though he might not

have ordered the break-in. As the investigation of the fund paid to the burglars was leading to the

White House‟s involvement, he had the CIA stop the FBI from conducting the investigation,

pronouncing that the investigation threatened national security. Countering the efforts to stop the

FBI inspection, the FBI‟s deputy director, W. Mark Felt, leaked information about the Watergate

to the Washington Post secretly. The case was blown up by the Post against the White House‟s

version since then, bringing two-sided puzzle for the public. The White House announced that

the President and people in the White House have connections with the burglary. Most

Americans believed the White House version. This was proven by Nixon‟s winning for the 1972

reelection. Nixon gained nearly 61 percent of the popular vote, compared to 37.5 percent for

George McGovern.5

The investigation done by the two reporters, FBI and other corporations came to an

investigation of the President. Woodward and Bernstein in the Washington Post portrayed in

simple language Nixon vast abuse of power during the 1972 election as follow:

Following members of Democratic candidates' families and assembling dossiers on their

personal lives; forging letters and distributing them under the candidates' letterheads;

leaking false and manufactured items to the press; throwing campaign schedules into

4 CREEP was a fund-raising organization for President Nixon's 1972 election campaign. Many of its members were

later indicted with criminal charges relating to their actions within the CRP. 5 http://teampride.yolasite.com/resources/Ch21.2.pdf

5

disarray; seizing confidential campaign files; and investigating the lives of dozens of

Democratic campaign workers.6

However, the President had built his legal defense before the investigators. Henry

Kissinger, the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, had tried to disavow his

former aides publicly and to accept a measure of responsibility for Watergate. However, the

suggestion was angrily rejected by saying “contrition is bullshit”. On January 30, 1974, the

President delivered his annual State of the Union Message to a joint session of the house and

Senate, the justices of the Supreme Court and the members of the Cabinet, as well as to other

guests and national TV audience. “One year of Watergate is enough,” he declared at the

conclusion and then implored the country and the Congress to turn to other, more urgent

matters.7

Through a series of judicial trial, all the House of Representatives, the Senate, the Chief

of Justice of the United States, gained the same conclusion about the president that he was the

man who would sit in judgment at a trial of impeachment. However, the president refused to

accept as he said, “I want you to know that I have no intention whatever of ever walking away

from the job that the American people elected me to do for the people of the United States.”8 The

Constitution, however, gives the House of Representatives power to conduct an impeachment

through Article II, Section 4, saying “the President‟ Vice President and all civil Officers of the

United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason,

Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”9 The articles of impeachment against him

were written as follow:

On June 17, 1972, and prior thereto, agents of the Committee for the Re-election of the

President committed unlawful entry of the headquarters of the Democratic National

Committee in Washington, District of Columbia, for the purpose of securing political

intelligence. Subsequent thereto, Richard M. Nixon, using the powers of his high office,

engaged personally and through his close subordinates and agents, in a course of conduct

or plan designed to delay, impede, and obstruct the investigation of such illegal entry; to

6 Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward, “FBI Finds Nixon Aides Sabotaged Democrats,” Washington Post 10 October

1972,http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/ content/article/2002/06/03/AR2005111001232.html,, retrieved on

5 March 2012 7 http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=4327, retrieved on September 1, 2014

8 http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=4327, retrieved on September 1, 2014

9 Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution

6

cover up, conceal and protect those responsible; and to conceal the existence and scope of

other unlawful covert activities.10

Moreover the Congressional Impeachment Articles accused Nixon of:

Approving, condoning, acquiescing in, and counseling witnesses with respect to the

giving of false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and

employees of the United States and false or misleading testimony in duly instituted

judicial and congressional proceedings.11

The presidential position, then, was given to the vice president, Gerald Ford on August 9, 1974.

In his Resignation speech, President Nixon praised Vice President Ford, "the leadership of

America will be in good hands,"12

ensuring that Ford would be the right person to continue his

position as the President of the United States.

Media’s Watchdog Role

The episode of revealing the scandal finalized in Richard Nixon‟s resignation has so far

been considered as a heroic media role. Some schools of journalism often teach the lesson of

Watergate issue and the media muckraking Woodward and Bernstein did as an example of

courageous press coverage. Nevertheless, some best remember the media muckraking played at

best a modest role in ousting Nixon from office. Yet, how important was the media muckraking

in exposing and bringing down the president? Some scholars argue Woodward and Bernstein‟s

investigative journalism did not play significant role. They merely uncovered several elements of

the misdeeds, a few days before it came out anyway. Indeed, even if media coverage had been

passive, Nixon would have been forced out of office.

Television and newspapers publicized stories and news in every single second, and the

investigative authorities play their part in revealing truth. With the burglars arrested, the

investigative authorities had collected the information to uncover the scandal. Without the media

muckraking, the FBI linked the burglars to the White House and traced the case. Woodward and

10

U.S. Congress, "Articles of Impeachment Adopted by the House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary,"

27 July 27 1974, Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=76082, (retrieved on 2 August 2014). 11

U.S. Congress, "Articles of Impeachment Adopted by the House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary,"

27 July 27 1974, Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=76082, (retrieved on 2 August 2014) 12

http://www.presidentialrhetoric.com/historicspeeches/nixon/resignation.html, retrieved on September 6, 2014

7

Bernstein were not the only persons successfully did the investigation. They systematically

marginalized the work of law enforcement officials to play their parts.

Conversely, Bernstein counters "You can't write 'if' history; history is what happened.

What happened is that the press coverage played a very big role in making information available

that the Watergate break-in was part of something vast and criminal and directed from or near

the Oval Office against President Nixon's opponents." He acknowledges that the "role of Bob

[Woodward] and myself has been mythologized" because "in great events people look for

villains and heroes" and oversimplify what happened. "At the same time, we were in the right

place at the right time and did the right thing."13

Washington Post reporters, Woodward and Bernstein, produced "the single most

spectacular act of serious journalism [of the 20th] century," said media critic Ben Bagdikian.14

Another scholar asserted what they did put American political history and journalism on the

same line, equally important. Marvin Kalb, a senior fellow at Harvard's Joan Shorenstein Center

on the Press, Politics and Public Policy, believes that the Post's reporting was "absolutely

critical" to "creating an atmosphere in Washington and within the government that Nixon was in

serious trouble and that the White House was engaged in a cover-up. I believe that the reporting

of Woodward and Bernstein represents a milestone of American journalism."15

The endless media coverage and televised congressional hearings made the scandal

always be in mind and fostered the prevalent negative picture about government that changed

American political system forever. Gladys Lang and Kurt Lang suggested that television was the

most effective and essential medium to rally public reaction against Nixon and his

administration. Television, furthermore, made the scandal more widespread among Americans,

breaking Nixon strategists‟ optimism that most of the public would not read the transcripts of the

hearings. According to the Gallup Poll, 42 percent of Americans had less favorable opinion of

Nixon after watching the hearings while only 17 percent had more favorable opinion about him.

More than 60 percent of the public supported the congressional decision to demand direct access

13

Carl Bernstein in http://ajrarchive.org/article.asp?id=3735, retrieved on August 28, 2014 14

Mark Feldstein, “Watergate Revisited,” in American Journalism Review, August-September 2004 in

http://ajrarchive.org/article.asp?id=3735, retrieved on September 10, 2014 15

Mark Feldstein, “Watergate Revisited,” in American Journalism Review, August-September 2004 in

http://ajrarchive.org/article.asp?id=3735, retrieved on September 10, 2014

8

to Watergate tapes. Even though many people did not watch the hearings, they probably read the

news reports through printed and other media.16

Undeniably, journalism gave great contribution to influence public opinion. Media

televised so many struggles between Nixon and his opponents. The more television played out

the news, the more public ready for the president‟s removal. Thomas Kazee expressed that

television helped shift perceptions of Nixon among people who were not interested in politics.17

Thus, journalism may help the public prepare for Nixon's removal, but it was not media that

forced the president to end his presidency. Instead, it was Congress. Shortly to say, media did not

play a leading role, but it did play a role. Besides, the impeachment of President Nixon reminded

public that no one is above the law, even the president of the United States.

Impacts on Journalism

What impact, then, have the Watergate investigative reports had on journalism? The case

triggered more and more journalists to explore deep concerning any issues related to the White

House. Since the Watergate, the relationship between the White House and the press has

changed forever. Many journalists are obsessed with rooting out evidence of government

corruption or public official failures, though they might be small or insignificant ones. These

journalists dream of Pulitzers and want to be seen as another figure of Woodward and Bernstein.

This has been a booming trend since then. Reporters not only seek and present information, but

also do “gotcha” investigation.

The number of investigative journalist has grown significantly since the Watergate. The

increasing interest in journalism was proven by the significantly increasing enrollment at the MU

School of Journalism, said Daryl Moen.18

“It certainly attracted hundreds, if not thousands,”

Moen said of the growth of all journalism schools in the post-Watergate era.19

This observable

fact occurred at other Journalism school‟s enrollment, too. Though the interest has decreased

recently, there has been an increase in the enrollment of journalism schools and journalism in

general.

16

Lang and Lang, "Polling on Watergate: The Battle for Public Opinion," 534-535. 17

Thomas Kazee, "Television Exposure and Attitude Change: The Impact of Political Interest," in The Public

Opinion Quarterly ( Oxford University Press, 1981) 516. 18

Daryl Moen was an MU journalism professor who was executive editor of the Columbia Missourian from 1974 to

1984 19

http://www.columbiamissourian.com/a/84628/watergate-gave-journalism-a-boost/, retrieved on September 5,

2014

9

Investigative reporting mushroomed and became a sexy trend. Woodward and Bernstein

attractively inspired young people to be investigative journalists to make changes. Both wrote All

the President’s Men, telling the coverage of the scandal and The Final Days, which illustrated

the last days of Nixon's administration. What the two journalists did brought a new image on

journalism, from merely reporting news to investigating scandals, which is more challenging.

Many journalists intentionally search for Watergate-like story even when there is none. This led

to media‟s negativity which disenfranchised many people.

Today, it is common to see journalists have their investigative team to analyze their

reports, inspired by what Woodward and Bernstein did. Besides, the changes included the

beginning of celebrity journalism in which the reporters become the story and unanimous

sources are more acceptable. “Woodstein” has launched the era of the journalists as celebrity. In

the era, journalists compete to gain fame and recognition through the news they report. The same

as the book Woodward and Bernstein wrote, All the President’s Men movie tells story about the

scandal, which boosted the two journalists‟ popularity. They themselves became the news for

other journalists to report. This phenomenon brought out an attractive side of journalism.

Another perfect prove of the trending journalism is the establishment of Investigative

Reporters and Editors, Inc. (IRE) in 1975. It is a grassroots nonprofit organization dedicated to

improving the quality of investigative reporting by providing a forum in which journalists

throughout the world could help each other by sharing story ideas, newsgathering techniques and

news sources. The incorporation has mission to foster excellence in investigative journalism,

which is essential to a free society. This can be achieved through some steps such as providing

training, resources and a community of support to investigative journalists, promoting high

professional standards, protecting the rights of investigative journalists, and ensuring the future

of IRE.20

Moreover, the constitutional protection that journalists enjoy justifies investigative

journalism or media muckraking. The First Amendment of US Constitution stated that “Congress

shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise

thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably

to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”21

Moreover, Article 19

20

http://www.ire.org/about/, retrieved on September 3, 2014 21

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/208044/First-Amendment, retrieved on September 2, 2014

10

of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights stated “everyone has the right to freedom of

opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to

seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”22

These articles boost the overwhelming growth of media muckraking today, disregarding the

media accountability and ethical standards.

Watergate Legacy to Public

To show how influential was the Watergate scandal, there are many scandals being

labeled with a “gate” suffix recently to make them attention-grabbing. Almost every scandal has

suffix “gate” attached to it. This phenomenon does not happen only in the USA, but also in some

other region. Besides, the suffix has not been attached only to political scandal, but also to any

scandals attractive enough to report. Some of the scandals with “gate” suffix attached are

Nipplegate (Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake), Monicagate (affair between Monica Lewinsky

and Bill Clinton), Spygate (New England Patriots), Tunagate in Canada, Dianagate/Squidgygate

and Thatchergate in the UK, Pemexgate, Toallagate in Mexico, Winegate in Franch (a scandal

involving chemicals being used to turn vinegar wine into table quality) and many more. To

American Journalism Review, Sam Dash, who served as chief counsel to the Senate Watergate

Committee all those years ago stated "When people hear this proliferation of 'gates,' they feel the

press is telling them this is the same as Watergate, and whatever Watergate has stood for has lost

its meaning."23

Nixon and the Watergate have left mixed legacy to public. What media exposed widened

the gap among the public and political elite. Skepticism of the government lived for some time

and there were no signs of abating any time soon. Though cynicism of the federal government

and public officials did not start from Watergate, the scandal has left long lasting impact on the

public confidence in the government. Garry Wills states that Americans have always viewed

their government with suspicion. He states that public distrust of government has influenced the

US political system since the early days of the republic.24

Stephanie Slocum-Schaffer points out

that Watergate had a significant impact on the 1970s and the rest of the century. She argues that

22

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a18, retrieved on September 2, 2014 23

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/columnist/rieder/2014/01/15/time-to-jettison-the-gate-suffix/4490115/,

retrieved on September 14, 2014 24

Garry Wills, A Necessary Evil: A History of American Distrust of Government (New York : Simon and Schuster ,

1999) 1-10.

11

Watergate caused the public to see the government as dishonorable.25

According to a Gallup

Poll, in 1972, before Watergate became the scandal of the decade, more than 50% of American

adults said they trust the government “all or most of the time”, while 45% opted for the “only

some of the time” alternative. By 1974, high trust had dropped to 36% and has remained below

50% since then, demonstrating the significant impact that the Watergate scandal has had on

public confidence in the U.S. government.26

While according to Darrel West, Ph.D., of Brown

University, for most people who came of age during the 1970s, Watergate was the crucial

political event. Before Watergate two-thirds of Americans trusted Washington but then after

Watergate two-thirds of Americans mistrusted Washington.27

The disbelief in the government as an impact of the Watergate challenged the presidents

after Nixon to restore and regain public‟s confidence in government.28

President Ford and Carter

failed to do this task. President Ronald Reagan was able to address this challenge through anti-

government rhetoric and an emphasis on reduction of government‟s hand in every way possible.

This tapped into the decline in confidence by rejecting the very idea that an active government

was a positive thing.29

He embraced an idea that an active government was unfavorable and that

the American people without government interference were best suited to cope with their own

problems. Trust in the Executive branch of government sank from 73% in May of 1972 to 40%

in April of 1974 at the height of the Watergate scandal. However, that trust rebounded to 58%

under Gerald Ford in June of 1976 and is currently at 62% under Bill Clinton.30

Another poll commissioned by the Senate subcommittee on intergovernmental affairs in

September 1973 found that public support for all major government institutions and public

officials was below thirty five percent.31

The myth portraying president as always great, reliable,

trustful and defender or the people‟s life was broken. Such a condition shifted the youth and job

seekers‟ interest to work in any government institutions. Many potential candidates for public

25

Slocum-Schaffer, America in the Seventies, (Syrcause: Syracuse University Press, 2003) 207, 210-211. 26

Gallup Poll in http://www.gallup.com/poll/4378/americans-faith-government-shaken-shattered-watergate.aspx,

retrieved on September 3, 2014 27

Quoted in Journalism Education Association, in http://jea.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/specialreport.pdf,

retrieved on September 6, 2014 28

Richard Harris, "The Era of Big Government Lives.” 29

Richard Harris, "The Era of Big Government Lives.” 30

Gallup Poll in http://www.gallup.com/poll/4378/americans-faith-government-shaken-shattered-watergate.aspx,

retrieved on September 3, 2014 31

The Associated Press, “Confidence in Government Sags,” in Daytona Beach Morning Journal, 3 December 1973.

12

officials and staffs for federal offices hesitated to register for the government image was ruined

by Watergate. There was a moment when it was difficult to find federal officers.

On the other side, the Watergate scandal has left positive legacies, too. The media and

publics are more aware of the people seeking for power. The uncovering journalism drove a

change on the transparency of the government and the people within. The governments meetings

and records are more accessible to public. The case aroused a demand to change the entire

political atmosphere to prevent such a crisis from happening again. A series of political reform

were made since the scandal was exposed in 1974. They are the Freedom of Information Act

(FOIA) in 1974, National Emergencies Act in 1976, Government in Sunshine Act in 1976, and

the Ethics in Government and Presidential Records Acts, both in 1978. Another important post-

Watergate reform was the passage of amendments to the Federal Elections Campaign Act

(FECA) in 1974, 1976, and 1979.

The Freedom of Information Act allows for the full or partial expose of previously

unreleased documents and information controlled by the United States Government. The

National Emergencies Act was to stop open-ended states of national emergency and formalize

the power of Congress to provide certain checks and balances on the emergency powers of the

President. The act imposes certain "procedural formalities" on the President when invoking such

powers. The Sunshine Act required government agencies, with exceptions, to conduct all

meetings open to the public. The Ethics in Government Act required public officials to disclose

their (and their immediate family) financial and employment history and create restrictions on

lobbying efforts by public officials for a set period after leaving public office. The Presidential

Records Act required preservation of all presidential records and documents. They are all to halt

any potential Watergate-like cases.

Nevertheless, the reforms failed to restore the public‟s trust in the government and were

not strong enough to prevent such event like Watergate scandal from happening. The

government always has its own way to prevent its secret from the publics‟ ears and media

coverage. Ted Sorensen, a former Kennedy speechwriter and advisor, stated that Watergate has

affected significantly every subsequent presidential administration, though the case may not be a

strong deterrent of similar misdeeds.

Removing the perpetrators of Watergate, even without altering the environment in which

they operate, should teach some future White House occupants the necessity of not trying

13

something similar. But it may only teach others the necessity of not being caught. History

has never proven to be a strong deterrent.32

Somehow, corruption like what Nixon did seems more difficult to do since the distrust caused by

the scandal has made the safeguard more aware of any government abuse of power.

Conclusion

Today, the Watergate scandal is still remembered as one of the U.S. terrible constitutional

crisis. On the other side, it represented a victory for democracy in America and is seen as a

perfect example of why freedom of the press is such an important part of preserving democratic

community and halting the government abuses of power. Though history may not have been a

good deterrent of any government misdeeds, the scandal has left important lesson for American

political system and how journalism works today. Mass media play a crucial role as a watchdog

of government and public officers. This is undeniably indispensable for democracy. Further, the

freedom of press seems to have been “exported” together with the spread of democracy.

Watergate signaled the birth of a more aggressive journalism. Considering the impacts of

Watergate on the development of journalism and American politics today, which possibly extend

across the border, it is imperative that the United Nations foster initiatives to strengthen the

capacity building of investigative journalism throughout the world. There should be debates or

discussions concerning the media accountability and ethical standards, providing journalists with

guiding principles on how to best perform their profession. This, hopefully, will lead journalists

to give more professional journalistic works in the future.

32

Theodore Sorensen, Watchmen in the Night: Presidential Accountability after Watergate (Cambridge : MIT

University Press , 1975) 7.

14

Refferences:

Bernstein, Carl and Bob Woodward. 1972. FBI Finds Nixon Aides Sabotaged Democrats.

Washington Post 10 October 1972, in http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/

content/article/2002/06/03/AR2005111001232.html, retrieved on 5 March 2012

Feldstein, Mark. 2004. Watergate Revisited, article in American Journalism Review, August -

September 2004 in http://ajrarchive.org/article.asp?id=3735, retrieved on September 10,

2014

Gallup Poll in http://www.gallup.com/poll/4378/americans-faith-government-shaken-shattered-

watergate.aspx, retrieved on September 3, 2014

Harris, Richard. 1997. The Era of Big Government Lives. Polity: Palgrave Macmillan Journals.

http://ajrarchive.org/article.asp?id=3735, retrieved on August 28, 2014

http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2071839_2071844_2071846,00.h

tml, retrieved on September 15, 2014

http://teampride.yolasite.com/resources/Ch21.2.pdf, retrieved on August 25, 2014

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/208044/First-Amendment, retrieved on September

2, 2014

http://www.columbiamissourian.com/a/84628/watergate-gave-journalism-a-boost/, retrieved on

September 5, 2014

http://www.ire.org/about/, retrieved on September 3, 2014

http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/cambodia/tl02.html, retrieved on September 10, 2014

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=4327, retrieved on September 1, 2014

http://www.presidentialrhetoric.com/historicspeeches/nixon/resignation.html, retrieved on

September 6, 2014

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a18, retrieved on September 2, 2014

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/columnist/rieder/2014/01/15/time-to-jettison-the-gate-

suffix/4490115/, retrieved on September 14, 2014

Journalism Education Association, in http://jea.org/wp-

content/uploads/2012/02/specialreport.pdf, retrieved on September 6, 2014

Kazee, Thomas A. 1981.Television Exposure and Attitude Change: The Impact of Political

Interest. In The Public Opinion Quarterly. Oxford: Oxford University Press

15

Lang, Gladys Engel, and Kurt Lang. 1980. Polling on Watergate: The Battle for Public Opinion.

In The Public Opinion Quarterly. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

President Nixon Resignation Address, in

http://www.presidentialrhetoric.com/historic.com/historisspeeches/nixon/resignation.html

retrieved on August 27, 2014

Slocum-Schaffer, Stephanie. 2003. America in the Seventies. Syracuse : Syracuse University

Press

Sorensen, Theodore. 1975. Watchmen in the Night: Presidential Accountability after Watergate.

Cambridge: MIT University Press.

The Associated Press. 1973.Confidence in Government Sags, in Daytona Beach Morning

Journal, 3 December 1973.

U.S. Congress. 1974. Articles of Impeachment Adopted by the House of Representative

Committee on the Judiciary, 27 July 1974, by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The

American Presidency Project, in http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=76082,

retrieved on 2 August 2014.

Wills, Garry. 1999. A Necessary Evil: A History of American Distrust of Government. New

York: Simon and Schuster