Comparing All The President's Men And Shattered Glass

All the President's Men

The film All the President's Men told the story of two reporters from the newspaper, The Washington Post, who uncovered and exposed the Watergate Scandal of 1972. Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein took risks during the investigation, but both did impeccable jobs in exposing the truth behind Watergate - that President Richard Nixon's association was involved. The story led to public outrage, and eventually caused President Nixon to be the first president in the history of the United States to resign from office. The film expressed many aspects we studied in News Literacy this semester. A few of things we studied include an editor's role in choosing which stories to publish and news drivers, the verification process,

and fairness when reporting and writing a story.
The first concept the movie illustrated in the journalism world is the editor's decision of which stories to run in the issue and different news drivers. In reference to the film, the news drivers the drove the Watergate scandal exposure were mainly prominence, conflict and relevance. Prominence relates to the person in the article and if he or she is a public figure. This article discussed and exploited several government officials, including the President of the United States. It is only natural that an audience be interested in reading about anything regarding the Commander-in-Chief of our country. Along with the prominence of the article is the conflict behind the article. Watergate was a scandal that the President's "Re-Elect Committee" was involved in to make sure that he was re-elected as President. In doing so, they broke into the Democratic Party's offices, and the five gentlemen being caught sparked the interest of the Washington Post. This conflict involving such high political figures clearly demonstrates the importance of the articles revolving around the scandal through the relevance of it. It is an issue that involved the entire country, as it showed dishonesty inside The White House. There was a scene from the film in which the editors and top reporters gathered to discuss which pieces were going to make it into the issue; a national story, there was a human-interest piece and more. The editor's decided that the Watergate scandal piece had not been good enough to make it into the issue yet. Ben Bradlee, the then Executive Editor at The Washington Post, critiqued Bernstein and Woodward's article over and over again, to make sure that the argument was strong enough to be published. Scenes such as these helped express the truth behind publishing a story to a newspaper. It is not as simple as some may think. It must be checked several times before it is chosen to be published for the newspaper issue.
Another step involved in the Watergate Scandal process was the entire verification process it takes when interviewing different sources to make a story as accurate as possible. For example, in the Watergate Scandal article, it was more than important for Woodward and Bernstein to interview numerous people, from both sides of the issue. Their editors and bosses constantly asked them to make sure that their witnesses were very clear in their statements. Throughout the entire film, the audience was able to feel the pen on the pieces of paper in the men's notepads when they would speak to everyone they saw regarding the case. In one seen, Bernstein is so desperate to get the Bookkeeper to tell him everything she knows, that he resorts to writing on the napkins she had in her sister's home. The "I'MVAIN" sequence took place several times during All the President's Men. "I-M-V-A-I-N" is an acronym used to judge whether or not a source is as reliable as possible. There was one particular scene in which it seemed the I'MVAIN sequence had failed Woodward and Bernstein's article. Their boss asked them, while screaming, "Goddammit, when is somebody going to go on the record in this story?" It was a moment like this that proved it is not just about the words that witnesses and testimonies say while being interviewed for an article, but it also the substance of that quote, and the reliability of that source. In the case of Watergate, most of the individuals interviewed were worried that their jobs or lives would be in jeopardy if they openly testified about the scandal. They therefore remained anonymous, and that "N" in "I'MVAIN" remained lost.
Finally, the film did a great job showing the importance of remaining transparent and fair throughout an investigative reporting routine. While Bernstein and Woodward interviewed a number of people who were willing to testify against the government and The White House, they also gave those that were being accused countless opportunities to defend the things they were accused of, as well as comment on the situation as a whole. There were a few instances in which Woodward and Bernstein sat at their desks to call different officials simply to say "I am running this story tomorrow, and was wondering if you would like to comment on this…". While the opportunities to defend the accusations, most of the gentlemen they called either referred the newspaper to their lawyers or simply hung up the phone after claiming they did not have time to deal with the nonsense. When writing a strong and sturdy article, it is important to remain neutral. Although the article may be purposed to expose someone, or several as the Watergate scandal did, giving all parties and both sides of the debate a chance to comment allows readers to know that the writer did additional research in their case. It gives news consumers comfort in knowing that the story is not "one-sided".
In some ways, the films All the President's Men and Shattered Glass can be compared.

One specific concept revolves around the verification process. In All the President's Men, the journalists were very responsible in making sure that they checked their sources several times before confirming or denying their statements. When their editors demanded that they be checked and re-checked, the men were sure to take down all of the information, sometimes even verbatim. Also, the men were required to do fact-checks on the things that they claimed. In one scene, Ben Bradlee tells the two men, "Now hold it, hold it. We're about to accuse Mr. Haldeman, who only happens to be the second most important man in America, of conducting a criminal conspiracy from inside the White House. It would be nice if we were right." At that point, the men rushed to confirm every single detail that they claimed was true, only to be confirmed on all accounts. In Shattered Glass, Stephen Glass failed miserably in the verification process of his last piece, "Hacker Heaven". The place this process collapsed was during the source checks and confirmations. The reporters at FORBE's were unable to confirm any of the witnesses that Glass claimed he had spoken to. While he made a fake website, gave FORBE's phone numbers of people who posed as the "witnesses", Glass was caught red handed by his own editor after going back to the scene of the story; later to be found out the event he claimed he went to never existed. Comparing the two films allows news consumers to decipher between a successful and error-proof verification process and one that is so faulty it ends a

career.
The film, All the President's Men was a story that went behind the scenes of the process of writing, editing, and publishing a story that could change an entire nation, as they know it. From the immensely detailed notes, to the constant rejections from political figures, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein never gave up. Their persistence and drive eventually led them to exposing a scandal that would go down in history, known simply today as Watergate.