Research Assistance

"ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN" & "THE FINAL DAYS".
Term Paper ID:20060

Essay Subject:
(Carl Bernstein & Bob Woodward). Compares two works on fall of Nixon because of Watergate scandal. Theses, methods, sources.... More...

5 Pages / 1125 Words
2 sources, 7 Citations, MLA Format
$20.00

More Papers on This Topic

Paper Abstract:
(Carl Bernstein & Bob Woodward). Compares two works on fall of Nixon because of Watergate scandal. Theses, methods, sources.

Paper Introduction:
This study will compare and contrast two works by Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward on the fall of the Nixon administration due to the Watergate scandal, All the President's Men and The Final Days. All the President's Men is more mystery story than anything else, and mystery stories do not rely heavily on theses or arguments, so it is difficult to label this book with a specific thesis. Certainly the authors believe that there is a and should be an adversarial relationship between the government and the press. Certainly they would argue that the Nixon administration was a corrupt one, and that its corruption was made even more intense by the fact that it had claimed to be a force for goodness. The authors end their first chapter with the words of Democratic Party chairman Larry O'Brien: "We learned of this

Text of the Paper:
The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper.

In All the President's Men,Woodward and Bernstein were more or less feeling their way through thicketafter thicket of deception, loosely guided by Deep Throat and othersources. (Four sources)described McCordas the consummate 'government man' --- reluctant to act on his owninitiative, respectful of the chain of command, unquestioning in followingorders" (Ibid. If there is a major difference between the two books, it is thatthere is not as great a sense of urgency in The Final Days. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1974.Woodward, Bob, and Bernstein, Carl. 23). Again, as with the best of newspaper journalism, the writing in Allthe President's Men is respectful of the reader and leaves it up to him orher to draw the thesis or theses. And yet even this despising isnot overt. We might fairly sayabout Woodward and Bernstein what Nixon attorney Buzhardt says abouthimself in The Final Days: "Buzhardt, balking, would say he didn't think itwas his job to give moral advice --- he was a lawyer" (Woodward & Bernstein22). Both books leave it up to thereader to draw larger moral conclusions, for example. The method used in both books was simple, hard, constant, old-timenewspaper reporting --- down-in-the-trenches work. Certainly these are arguments with which Woodward and Bernstein wouldagree, but they are not overtly stated. The reporters explored his background and foundmuch of interest, but the key to his involvement was his relationship withthe government: "Several persons referred to McCord's integrity, his'rocklike' character, but there was something else. This study will compare and contrast two works by Carl Bernstein andBob Woodward on the fall of the Nixon administration due to the Watergatescandal, All the President's Men and The Final Days. In TheFinal Days, on the other hand, the story is long over. For example, there is a clear undercurrent thatit is simply a great deal of fun and excitement to ferret into the darknessfor facts which will help bring down a man (Nixon) and an administrationwhich are despised by the two reporters. In the Foreword to the book, then, we findWoodward and Bernstein specifying "twenty-two areas of inquiry," and "fromthese areas of inquiry, we drew up a preliminary list of several hundredpersons to be interviewed. It is hardly a leisurely account of thebehind-the-scenes elements of Watergate, but it is not as nerve-wracking asthe first book. It is certainly true that without Deep Throat itmight have taken Woodward and Bernstein longer to get their story, but itis likely that they still would have gotten it, or at least enough of it toenable them to do their part in bringing down the Nixon administration andexposing the illegalities and corruption of that government. Works CitedBernstein, Carl, and Woodward, Bob. Therefore, while theirarguments may be clear to the attentive reader, those arguments for themost part remain unstated. Again, Deep Throat merelyguided the reporters at crucial moments, letting them know when they weregetting off the track. The Final Days covers the same general period of time asAll the President's Men, but its contents are more focused on the personaland the private more than on the political and the legal. All thePresident's Men is a compelling account of two reporters trying to find outthe truth about an administration desperate to keep its secrets and itspower at a time of internal collapse. With or without Deep Throat, the story was inevitably one whichrequired meticulous attention to details, to suggestions, to implication.to the tiniest leads which revealed some crucial fact about some aspect ofthe story. The reporters acknowledge that fact in theirdedication to the first book, and in The Final Days they are more specificabout the nature of their method and sources. They are telling the storyof their coming-of-age as major league journalists and their roles inbringing out the facts of criminal behavior on the part of people who weresupposed to be executing the laws of the country. It is unfair to saythat All the President's Men was basically the result of the informationgiven to the two reporters by Deep Throat. Certainly,the insider's accounts of both books rely on individuals deep within theNixon administration. Nixon himself seems to havepraised, in his way, the role of Woodward and Bernstein and the role of thepress in uncovering the truth: "It was the system that has brought thefacts to light . The account is marked by thereportial methods of Woodward and Bernstein which intensify that compellingaspect of the story. The second book can be called gossip on one hand, as it hasbeen by critics of the reporters, but it can also be seen as an amendmentto the first book in that it takes us even more deeply and intimately intothe corruption of the Nixon administration. Without them there would have been noWatergate story told by the Washington Post" (All the President's Men 7). All the President's Men. information clear: "To the President's other men andwomen---in the White House and elsewhere --- who took risks to provide uswith confidential information. We spent six months on the task. How many other attempts have there been and just who wasinvolved? Both books generally use the same methods and sources. What the reader wants tomake of this is the reader's business. a system that in this case has included a determinedgrand jury, honest prosecutors, a courageous judge..... Similarly, it seems that the authors are saying, indirectly, thatthey are journalists, reporters, trying to stick to the facts, and that itis not their job to give moral advice, to present theses which go beyondthe bounds of journalism. In The Final Days, on the other hand, we find less of such acompelling, frantic feeling. McCord led the reporters up the chain of command to the White House.Following the McCord lead with fundamental journalistic methodology, thereporters discovered another tip of the iceberg of corruption that was theNixon administration. Theinformation in both books could not have been gleaned without thecooperation of insiders. This thesis might be that the truth is not easily found, thatit is not easily uncovered when it is found, and that, once it is found, itis darker than we might have imagined. The FinalDays is based on interviews with 394 people. 21). . Certainly they would argue that the Nixonadministration was a corrupt one, and that its corruption was made evenmore intense by the fact that it had claimed to be a force for goodness.The authors end their first chapter with the words of Democratic Partychairman Larry O'Brien: "We learned of this bugging attempt only because itwas bungled. In fact, their dedication makesthe nature of their.. mail intime of war" (Ibid. Still, the methods and the sources are roughly the same. Woodward and Bernstein again and againmake much of the struggles they must endure with their editors andespecially their publisher in getting out what they see as the facts andthe truth. They discovered that McCord belonged to a reserveunit whose "Assignment" it "was to draw up lists of radicals and to helpdevelop contingency plans for censorship of the news media and U.S. . The authors are seriousjournalists, and serious journalists pride themselves on presenting thefacts as they find them --- after sufficient corroboration --- and stayingout of the "argument" business as much as possible. Some persons spent dozens ofhours with us and volunteered information freely Others granted interviewssimply to give their version of events All interviews were conducted 'onbackground'; that is we could use the in the identity of the source wouldremain confidential" (The Final Days 11-12). The Final Days. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1976.----------------------- 7 Still, despite these many possible theses, the fact remains that theauthors/reporters leave much up to the reader. Still, there is littleevidence of an overtly declared thesis. and a vigorous freepress" (Ibid. Certainly the authorsbelieve that there is a and should be an adversarial relationship betweenthe government and the press. The Final Days cannot be said to be as much a public service as thefirst book. They did not know what the story was in the beginning. The reporters knowwhat they are trying to do, they know the story and precisely what parts ofit they want to pursue. 311). For example, in All the President's Men the reporters aretrying to discover the nature of the involvement of one of the Watergateburglars, James McCord. I believe we are about to witness the ultimate test of thisadministration that so piously committed itself to a new era of law andorder just four years ago" (Bernstein & Woodward 26). In short, the two books have many more similarities than differenceswith respect to theses, methods and sources. While All the President's Men was certainlyguided by Deep Throat, Woodward and Bernstein did not print anything thatthey could not verify with other sources. All the President's Men is more mystery story than anything else, andmystery stories do not rely heavily on theses or arguments, so it isdifficult to label this book with a specific thesis. There is another argument with respect to the authors' efforts to getat and print the truth in the context of a respected newspaper's ethical,legal and journalistic standards.

If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again:

Browse Essays by Subject

Browse more subjects...

All Subjects

<< Back TO Main Subjects...