Since we spent most of three class periods watching the film, this blog will be worth 90 points.
Be sure to address everything. Each part is worth 10 points. One sentence will not give you full credit. Be thorough — like Woodstein!
Your thoughtful, well-written discussion is due by 11 a.m. Wednesday, March 29.
Part 1 — What did you learn about newspapers and journalism from watching the film?
Part 2 — What did you learn about how reporters do their jobs? What surprised you?
Part 3 — What is your impression of Woodward and Bernstein? Include a discussion of their tactics/methods.
Part 4 — What is your impression of Ben Bradlee? What was his importance to this story?
Part 5 — How have methods of journalism changed since Watergate?
Part 6 — Was the Washington Post right to pursue the story the way it did? Why or why not? How did ethics come into play?
Part 7 — What effect have Woodward and Bernstein had on journalism and society?
Part 8 — What has been the effect of the Watergate story on society?
Part 9 — Do you see parallels between Watergate and what's going on in Washington today? Explain why or why not.
I learned that it takes a lot of guts and you cannot be scared to approach others in order to find information about your story. You need to be able to back up whatever you claim, and it can be dangerous if you report unreliable information to the public. I believe that it is a hard job, because not everything that you write will be published or considered important by the gatekeepers. I was surprised by how many people were willing to talk to them and how they never gave up even when they were told no. It takes a lot of motivation to keep yourself from crashing down and giving up. Woodward and Bernstein were good talkers. They knew how to “manipulate” people, but not in a way where they were hurting them. They know how to do their job. Ben Bradlee was a source of motivation for the two young journalist. He really cared for them and was like a father figure. If it was not for him then they probably would have given up on the story or it would have never made the papers. I don’t think people harass people as much anymore. Another thing is that people and journalist are not as scared to report about the white house anymore. I think they pursued it in a good way, because it was the only way to get people to talk. It is a good thing that they were able to find out that there was foul play because if they never did then no one would know if anyone was abusing their power. Methods have changed because there is a limit to the amount of harassment that someone can get. Watergate has made people more skeptical about the things that people with a ton of power are doing. The people deserve to know what is happening and they tend to believe more things now, no matter who it is about. I see similar things because there are a lot of journalist that have been writing articles about the people in the white house, and there have been a few stories in which there were people in power that were accused or caught doing things that they should not be doing.
ReplyDeleteSomething I learned about journalism is that, even with the promise/use of anonymous sources, people can be very unwilling to help. Also, the gatekeeping process (at least, according to the movie) seems to be the most powerful position at a news organization, since you decide what is released.
ReplyDeleteI was surprised how many hunches/gut feelings reporters have to use when there's little information.
Carl Bernstein had a very outgoing attitude, and his methods were a bit unorthodox, yet on the other hand Bob Woodward was much more "professional" in how he did things, even the gaining of an Anonymous source which was portrayed in the film as being quite shady.
Ben Bradlee seems like he would be a tough boss, yet one who would believe in his employees. Bradlee's importance to this story is shown in him giving "Woodstein" the support and backing to continue their investigation into Watergate.
One of the ways that journalism has changed since Watergate is that Anonymous sources seem to be used more than before to uncover big cases. Another way it has changed is journalists have a more notable responsability to uncover political corruption, especially these days.
The way the Washington Post perished the story was, in my opinion, still within the ethical guidelines of the code of ethics. While "Woodstein" sort of manipulated some of their interviewies, they did it in a way were they would not be hurt in anyway, which falls under the code of ethics.
"Woodstein" has had a huge impact on media and society. They have made the importance of journalism known and made the field overall more of a mainstream thing, inspiring many future journalists.
The Watergate story had a large impact on society as well. The incident lead to the first resigning of a U.S. President and a general urge for the public to know the truth.
I see many parallels between Watergate and the current state of the Whitehouse, most notably in the war against the media. President Trump and Former President Nixon have both at some point called the media the enemy. During Watergate, the Washington Post was questioned at every turn and denied sources by most who they spoke to, today many news outlets are being called out for "fake news" reguardless of the truth of the statement. Both of these are blatant attacks of the media while they're trying to uncover the truth.
Part 1: I learned about Journalism in this film by making sure you have facts about everything you write. Even though you make think you know what is real always make sure you have sources to back it up. Also another thing I learned is that just because someone tells you that something is false does not mean it is.You should always check behind what they are saying.
ReplyDeletePart 2: I was surprised that even though alot of people had the chance to help them out they didnt. I feel like it would be a scary position to be in trying to take the most powerful man in the world down,but I would want to help them as best as I knew I could. I know that if it could save me from being an accomplice from that person I would do the right thing.
Part 3: My impression was that they were two persistent men who knew they had the truth and did not stop until they got it.For instance when Woodward went to the last women's house when he was by himself he knew alot about what he was asking the women and used that he knew he just wanted to make sure that what he was going to write in the paper was true. When they both went over they used men's names that they wanted to confirm and they got it by acting like they knew it already.
Part 4: Ben Bradlee was the editor-in-chief of the newspaper that the two worked for and he was the one who said if they could or could not run the article. Mr.Bradlee gave me the impression that he wanted justice but got tired of noone going on the record. But he believed in the two men so much that he let them run it anyway. To me that was really brave considering it would be his job if it wasnt correct.
Part 5: They have changed as far as what can and cannot be in the paper. I dont know that without correct sources you would be able to run what they could then. It has to be so much fact now. It is more ethical as far as what can and cannot be ran in the paper.
Part 6: While is was a little risky to run something it was ethical to get all the information they could. Getting all the information and letting people get the chance to say they did or did not do what they did was ethical.
Part 7: The two men have an impact by the way they both went about the situation by being able to say no it was not this way and get the truth out there to people was important to media and society.The two showed that it is so important to be in the field of media and society.
Part 8: That even the most "honest" people can be crooks and to always watch your back as far as writing the truth.Making sure that all the facts are true and that people make things up to make themselves look better. Watergate makes people question the motives of people. It made sure that the truth will always come out.
Part 9: I see that there may be some kind of parallel as far as the President calling the media evil and only wanting the ones that talk good about him be in on what is going on per say. I can only hope that we do have ethical journalist such as Bernstein and Woodward who dont stop until they find the truth.
Part 1 — Ethics in journalism has definitely changed. There was a lot of shady undercover reporting that did a lot of good in the end. Newspaper are also heavily chained in the sense that every story goes up through people, whether it’s editing or going towards publishing. There’s also a lot of fact checking no matter what time you’re looking at.
ReplyDeletePart 2 — Reporters go through a lot of hoops in order to do their job. Not to mention all the work they put in a story can get thrown out because another story was more important or more relevant. What surprised me the most was how many “filters” every story had to go through just to make it up to the editors and publishers. It’s crazy to think that people can put in a ton of work just to have their story thrown out.
Part 3 — Carl Bernstein was the less “professional” of the two, but he tended to get more results with being slightly unethical and unorthodox. Bob Woodward was definitely professional in how he conducted himself and made sure all of his T’s were crossed and I’s were dotted. Woodward focused more on getting the facts and double checking to make sure they were correct while Bernstein was always chasing a story.
Part 4 —Ben Bradlee has a huge personality boss wise, but he also seems super supportive of all of his reporters which is amazing. His importance was pivotal to the entire story. He was one of the gatekeepers that allowed the Watergate story to be exposed.
Part 5 — Things are definitely more ethical in how journalists go about getting information from sources. Anonymous sources are still very important in today’s journalism world. Other than that, things really haven’t changed. At least in my perspective.
Part 6 — Was the Washington Post right to pursue the story the way it did? Why or why not? How did ethics come into play?
Part 7 — They made society realize how important and needed journalists are. They can get into places that ordinary citizens can have issues getting into. They have connections to sources that can offer “classified” information.
Part 8 — It has broken the US citizens’ perception of the White House and how things were handled behind the scenes. It also brought out the distrust that American’s have in the government even more.
Part 9 — I definitely see a parallel between Watergate and what’s going on today. There’s nothing but denial for every story that paints the white house and its employees in a negative light. There are very defensive and limiting who gets news.
Part 1 — What did you learn about newspapers and journalism from watching the film?
ReplyDeleteFrom watching the film I learned that journalism isn’t an easy job where you write columns and stories on the local cheese festival. It is that but so much more. Journalism can be a investigative practice that works for the public to give them accurate information. This si a generalization, but the public believes the people who are in charge, and that is the government. So when you have people, journalist who are willing to question these people in a authority, they are working for the people to help us. We believe what the president tells us because how would be know otherwise? We know otherwise if the press does their job and exposes the truth for us. We trust the press, as we should. Tensions are higher right now with the press and journalism because the leader of our country is trying to dismantle the trust we have in the system but we cannot allow this to happen. We must trust our reputable journalist.
Part 2 — What did you learn about how reporters do their jobs? What surprised you?
I saw that reporters have to put in a low of time and know a lot of people to get their work done. The information can be time sensitive and if you are not working around the clock then you will probably lose your story, especially if it is trying to be covered up. It is surprising to see the Watergate crisis acted out and dramatized because it makes it so much more real. This happened in our country and the journalist had to do everything they could to uncover the truth. In that time it was harder to find out information on people because there was no internet to google everything and the journalist really had to be keen in their efforts and leads.
Part 3 — What is your impression of Woodward and Bernstein? Include a discussion of their tactics/methods.
Both journalist were hungry for a story. Woodward was the one that stumbled upon the strange case that eventually led to one of the most corrupted government operations in history. He tried to be clean and an honest journalist. Bernstein was a little different. He wasn’t a free face in the newspaper industry so he had some experience with writing and pulling information out of people. I feel like the tactics used, especially by Bernstein, could bring up a questions of ethics. He was pretty coercive and forced his way around to get what he wanted. Unfortunately, we probably wouldn’t have this story if it wasn’t for his questionable tactics.
Part 4 — What is your impression of Ben Bradlee? What was his importance to this story?
My impression of Ben Bradlee is that he is an experienced journalist and newspaper man. He wants Woodward and Bernstein to succeed in their journalism and in uncovering the story. He wants the Woodward and Bernstein to do their best work and to get sources and people on the record. He is looking at the professionalism and us trying to show them the importance of being right and correct with what they publish. But also, to understand the repercussions of being wrong. He wants them to get the story down because it is the press’s job to hold the government accountable. His expertise is needed to help guide the two journalists and to motivate them to get down to the bottom of the story, the turned out to be one of the biggest scandals in American History.
Part 5 — How have methods of journalism changed since Watergate?
I feel like there is a higher level of ethics in professional journalism since the Watergate story. Bernstein uses questionable methods when gathering his source material. In todays journalism, a named source is almost always required to have sort of creditability to the public. On a technical level, there are more advancements in todays world that make it easier for journalists to gather information- the internet.
Part 6 — Was the Washington Post right to pursue the story the way it did? Why or why not? How did ethics come into play?
ReplyDeleteIt seems that when the American public is at stake, journalist can take more risks to expose the secrets and scandals that affect the public. It is up to the press to hold the government accountable and uncover the corruption within out government. At the time, it was uncovering Watergate and how the Republican party was swindling the elections. Now, we have similar situation going on with the Trump campaign and Russia. I fully trust the press and I need them to being light to this situation because the American people need to know the truth. I feel like they need to do whatever they can to get the truth because the repercussions are so influential on our society. Even with the questionable ethics, the Washington Post had to pursue the story for our society and for the truth. Ethics come into to play and they may be questionable at times, but I can reason that it was needed to expose this crime.
Part 7 — What effect have Woodward and Bernstein had on journalism and society?
I think Woodward and Bernstein had a positive impact on journalism and society. For journalism, I think it pushed more people to be in question of what they were doing. What is the point of the work of the press? The press works for the people and we count on them to report to us the news and to uncover the news that we need to know. I think with society, the impact has been similar. I hope that this pushed more people to trust the press and appreciate them. But also, to question authority and to know more about what is going on around them and in their government. It showed the establishment that they cannot step all over the American people for their own power-hungry benefits.
Part 8 — What has been the effect of the Watergate story on society?
I feel like I just answered this in the last question, but there has been an effect on society from the uncovering of this story. Watergate was probably viewed of as a leap to be true but journalist worked hard to find reliable, creditable information to prove it true. Society can see that the press is working for the people and that they are here to help us and hold authority accountable for us. The everyday American could not possibly have been able to uncover something like this without the help of the press because the reason it was such a big deal is because it was uncovered and made public.
Part 9 — Do you see parallels between Watergate and what's going on in Washington today? Explain why or why not.
It was actually very eye-opening to watch this film because it seemed very predictable of what we are dealing with right now in Washington. There are so many issues with foreign countries and our authority figures only doing things out of their own self-interest and not the interest of the American people. The craziest parallel has to be the corruption in the election which led to Watergate and everything being uncovered and how right now journalists are trying to find out the Trump campaigns ties to Russia and their influence in the election. It is almost a mirror situation. The only difference to me is that the authority figures seem to glorify themselves in the corruption, and back during Watergate, the establishment was very formal when it came to accusations publicly, and I do not see that happening now with our current administration.
Part 1- I learned that newspapers have a huge impact on our society. I learned that no matter what other people say, if you believe you are doing the right thing and following the right story stick to it. I also learned to make sure the news you hear or see is the truth, because it could always be a lie.
ReplyDeletePart 2- I learned that reporters have to do a lot of work and that they do a lot of “backtracking” and making sure that the news they put out is the absolute truth. They make sure that they have many sources, and they go over and beyond to make sure that they get the news even if they have to sit for hours to get one confirmation. What surprised me is that they were all getting so much money undercover, it makes me worried. It makes me think about our society and how much debt we’re in in the United States. The question comes to my mind, “Are we still having some of these “undercover” problems today.”Are our reporters in today’s society, passionate about their job, and what they do as much as bernstein and woodward where. That they’ll go over and beyond to make sure the president and his cabinet are not making any undercover moves.
Part 3- I think Woodward and Bernstein represent the true definition of journalist. By them going over and beyond to make sure they had all of the right facts for the story. No matter what they sticked to the story even though their co-workers doubted them. They just pushed and found another source. They had a lot of ambition and determination, and I hope to be just as ambitious as them someday.
Part 4- Ben Bradlee was the chief of staff in the Watergate. Throughout the movie he had some doubt of the story, but in the end he believed in them and told them “Run that Baby!” that tells a lot about him as a boss and a person.
Part 5- Methods have changed since Watergate because now in our society, I don’t think they would’ve been able to run the story with having actual anonymous sources. They wouldn’t have been able to go about the story the way they did. But, other than that I think reporters are still carrying out their duties as journalist.
Part 6- Yes, they had all the right to pursue the story the way they did, because they saw that something wasn’t right and they looked into the story more in depth. As a reporter and journalist they did their job, and in the end it all paid off.
Part 7- Woodward and Bernstein pushed the exposure in journalism and the Code of Ethics. That no matter what position you hold, you will be held accountable for your actions. They showed us what true journalism is, and how important it is to be a journalist then and now.
Part 8- It has caused society to pay closer attention to what is going on in the white house and in our society. That even the highest people, that we trust the most can do the lowest things. No matter what the truth will always come out, especially when you are a public figure.
Part 9 - Yes, I believe it is parallel to the things that is going on in Washington today. In the Watergate they realized it was a lot of undercover crooks. Especially since now they are investigating if Trump had any ties with Russia in the presidential election. I believe now the people and reporters are starting to hold him more accountable for his actions and the things that he states, and speaks about publicly because he is a public figure. I believe our reporters are paying close attention to not only his action but their actions in the white house, and making sure that we are getting the absolute truth.
Pt.1 I learned that you have to make sure everything is true before putting it in the paper and not just going off things based on opinions. Also that there are people who may tell you something's are false just because they don't want it to be publish, which makes it extremely necessary to dig up everything about what you're trying to publish.
ReplyDeletePt.2 A reporters job can be very dangerous in so many cases due to the fact there are some people who don't like them. I was surprised that it wasn't as many people who were willing to help them when they were doing it for everyone in country. Even when they were told no when trying to get information they hardly took no for an answer they took their jobs very seriously.
Pt.3 My impression on Woodward and Bernstein was two determine individuals who would do anything to get the facts for their story. They knew their jobs were dangerous but they didn't care they felt the public should know what's going on. When Bernstein went to the woman house and drank so many cups of coffee that really showed determination; it took him a minute to get the information he needed but he got it.
Pt.4 My impression on Ben Bradlee was that he was the type of boss anyone wish they could have. He might not have believed that their story belonged on the on the front page at first, but he still let them run it. He just wanted someone to go on the record for once so people wouldn't be able to say they were making it up. He wanted the story to be everything he knew it could be he just needed someone to go on the record for once.
Pt.5 As for as a lot of people not going on the record I think that has changed. There has to be facts about everything before going in the paper because it's a lot more of opinionated people these days. Also what can and cannot go in the paper has changed as well.
Pt.6 I think it was necessary to purse the story because things like the Watergate would have continued to go for a long time because nothing was done about it. It was very risky but it needed to be done; the people had a right to know what was going on right in front of them.
Pt.7 Woodstein effect on journalism was big it showed that they took there jobs very seriously and they would do anything to get the facts to their story. Also showed that journalists play a big part in society as well as other people, and to be respectful and careful when doing their job.
Pt.8 The effects from the Watergate story shows that even the people we all look up too can be the biggest crooks in the world it makes you question their motives, it also shows that you can't put anything past anyone. It shows that the truth will come out on way or another and that you should have all of your facts before publishing a story.
Pt.9 What happen with Watergate may be repeating today, there are many similarities from the past. The president today doesn't like reporters he calls them the "enemy". I feel like the journalists today should take action and find the truth like Woodward and Bernstein.
Part 1: Journalist do not simply report the news, Journalist seek the news. They create the news from the evidence that they gather. The newspapers also hold a lot of power. We see, all throughout the movie, the politicians are afraid of the power that the newspapers have.
ReplyDeletePart 2: Reporters are seemingly on the phones all the time, trying to contact sources. Reporters also will search all leads, even when it makes no sense to follow them (like how Woodward and Bernstein went through the library records). Also, the connections they had were astonishing. To be able to call the top officials of the United States is amazing.
Part 3: Woodward and Bernstein make a great team. As we see throughout the movie, they are constantly relying on each other. We see Woodward had the connection to Deep Throat. This would be the key to open doors. And Bernstein would write the paper (as we see he cleans up Woodward's work earlier in the movie). Bernstein also seemed to have the persuasion over people. To mold people into doing what he wants. Woodward seemed like a much honest person. He would not lie to any of the people, nor force them to talk. As we see when he approaches the ladies house, and he tells them that it would not be for their own good to talk to them. But, Bernstein seems a bit more devious. He would convince these people to talk to him through manipulation. Such as calling the office lady, so she will leave, so he could get the records from the man.
Part 4: Ben Bradlee was a man who would take nothing less than the best. He would not settle for a story that did not have any true backing behind it. He served as the gatekeeper. Making sure that the stories that went onto the newspaper were quality, and that it did not have any glaring issues with them.
Part 5: Journalism now has many more mediums. We now have a broader use of television, social media, and websites. Although, journalist are now under scrutiny by everyone. No one wants to trust journalist. The left does not want to trust the right journalist, and the right does not want to trust the left journalist. Journalist now have to ride a very thin line, and they are still harassed about their work.
Part 6: The Washington Post had every right to pursue the story. They were not putting out stories that were full of falsehoods, and assumptions. The gate keepers were making sure to keep the story where it should be. The ethics of the Washington Post are fine, but with the reporters is where is gets muddled. All throughout, we see that ethics are blurred throughout. Like Bernstein calling the office lady, Bernstein pressuring the lady to talk, and Woodward pressuring Deep Throat to talk (at the end).
Part 7: They have inspired journalist. They have inspired them to not just to look at the facts at face value, but to delve into the story. To have courage. To be able to take on the biggest opponents (in their case, the US government). Society would learn to rely on journalist after that. That journalist were there to keep the government in check.
Part 8: Well, we are starting to see a trend of this coming back. But, Watergate taught society that we do not need to have complete trust in our officials. That there needs to be a certain amount of distrust for us to actually look into there endeavors. That even someone as high up as the president of the US can be a crook.
Part 9: Absolutely. We see the White House today constantly trying to erode the credibility of journalist. Just like the White House did during the Watergate scandal. If you can taint the well with a trickle of doubt, you have poisoned it for everyone. We are also starting to see reporters trying to crack the connections to Russia that Donald Trump seems to have. Much like how Woodward and Bernstein cracked the Watergate scandal.
Part 1- I learned that newspapers and journalism is a competitive business. You need to get the news before another media source does. It needs to be accurate. It has to be approved by your boss and probably your boss's boss. When I first joined this class I thought journalism wouldn't be that hard. However, now I have a small idea of everything that has to be done and I'll give credit where credit is due. Their jobs are a lot more difficult than expected.
ReplyDeletePart 2- I minimized the work load of a reporter as well, but found out that they have quite a bit on their plates. They have a due date for their story that must be approved, have all the right facts, and be completed before another news source has the chance to publish that story first. I didn't take into consideration that when interviewing someone you could get turned away in the rudest way possible or in drastic cases, get threatened. Is that why there's usually two reporters for a story, to help share the work load? I was surprised how much work is involved and I can't image the stress that comes with that.
Part 3- Woodward and Bernstein are excellent reporters, and they made a great team. The thing that impressed me was when they were trying to figure out the initials of the three guys. So the next time they talked to that lady Bernstein said we need to know who P is and before she could answer, Woodward said No P is Porter. By doing that they got the lady to verify all of the initials so that they could put it in the paper. I thought it was a pretty solid tactic.
Part 4- When first being introduced to Ben Bradlee, I thought he was a bit hard on Bernstein and Woodward. However you have to be when running a paper. Throughout the movie, I saw that he was the kind of boss I hope to have in the future. He was getting irritated that they had so many anonymous sources, but that's because he needed them to be sure about the story. He wasn't one hundred percent sure about the Watergate story, but he stood behind Bernstein and Woodward.
Part 5- Methods of journalism have greatly changed since Watergate. There's a lot more fake news going around and less consideration about ethics. Several people will put in some truth to a story and make the rest of it their opinions. Too many people either learn to the left side or the right side.
Part 6- I believe Washington post had the right to pursue the story because if they didn't I doubt anyone else would have. Then, no one would have known the truth. I don't see a problem with the way they went about getting their information either. They reported the truth. They minimized harm, because they used anonymous source so people wouldn't get hurt. Technically, they did act independently because they didn't write anything false because of a bribe, and their stories were very transparent. So I don't have a problem with how they got their information because they did follow the Code of Ethics.
Part 7- In my opinion, Woodward and Bernstein changed journalism in society for the better. They showed hard work and a great amount of perseverance the whole time they wrote about Watergate. Even when almost everyone was against them, they knew the truth and they were determined to share it.
Part 8- The effect that the Watergate story had did change how society views our Presidents. It's taken quite a bit of trust out of the government. When Hilary was running for presidency, so many people went crazy about the email scandal. I believed they had every right too. People are afraid to get another Nixon into office, however I doubt Trump was the best solution for the problem.
Part 9- I do some similarities between Watergate and what's going on in Washington today. For example, Trump doesn't want any anonymous sources to have any use in news media. If it wasn't for anonymous sources, Nixon wouldn't have been caught and found out. Also, Trump calls new sources the "enemy of the people." It's very similar when the Washington post was getting discredited.
Part 1:I learned quite a bit about newspapers and journalism over the course of watching this film. The first being that newspaper stories and newspaper journalism can be just as important and exciting as television. The next thing is that you cannot be scared as a journalist-you do what you have to do to get the truth out there for your story. I think the most important lesson I learned from this movie is to not give up, even when it seems like you’ve hit a dead end if you feel like there is more to the story, because they’re usually is.
ReplyDeletePart 2:I learned that reporters have to be fearless. That surprised me-as most people think about journalists, they don’t think brave. But Woodward and Bernstein changed that because of how relentless they were to get the truth to the people, even when their lives were on the line. They showcase how as a journalist, you have to get all of your facts checked, double checked, and sometimes triple checked to make sure you’re correct before displaying your story to the world! That surprised me, honestly. While I have always loved journalism, I never thought of journalism as a “you have to be brave to do it” career, but this movie changed that for me. It’s hard work.
Part 3:I have such high respect for Woodward and Bernstein because while they went to extreme measures to get the information they needed, in my opinion they never compromised their morals or ethics. I hope to be that kind of journalist, even when I realize that every story is not going to be Watergate. Probably my favorite tactic they used in the movie was when they went to the woman’s house and used names they believed were correct (though they weren’t sure) to get her to thoroughly confirm it instead of trying to coerce it out of her over and over. I believe that saved all parties involved, the woman and the journalists’, from wasting time and exhausting their sources.
Part 4:I hope to someday work for a boss who believes in me like Ben Bradlee believed and trusted Woodward and Bernstein even though everyone else thought they were going to mess up. Being the Editor In Chief, he had the ultimate veto power, but after seeing Woodward and Bernstein’s hard work he gave them the authority to run the story. Without Ben Bradlee, the story would never have come to the attention of the public.
Part 5:Journalism is now more free because of Watergate. Newspapers and major news outlets are not scared to cover the “big bad” news stories anymore, but instead run into it full steam. Because of Watergate, the American public has changed too and we crave the information about the inner workings of the White House to make sure that nothing fishy is going on. And when we sense that something could be going awry, we look for that information from the journalists.
Part 6:I believe they had the utmost right and I would say the duty to pursue this story. I don’t believe the Washington Post or Woodward and Bernstein compromised their ethics to cover and run this story. The only possible ethics issue might be “if it does more harm than good, don’t run it.” But for some news stories, I believe there are exceptions, such as the question who is it “harming?” If you say that Watergate harmed Nixon and his presidency, you would be correct, but Nixon was harming the American public because he was lying to them, so ultimately the story was pursued for “good.” I do have to say there is a fine line between harm and good in journalism, but I do not believe the Washington Post or any of its staff crossed it.
ReplyDeletePart 7:Woodward and Bernstein had a massive effect on journalism and society! Now the American public doesn’t look at journalists as muckrakers, rather they look at them as our source of help and information. With the new president who now claims journalists are the enemy, I pray that does not change. An uninformed or misinformed people is an easy to control people.
Part 8:We look at President’s workings at the White House differently in the way that society gets more watchful when they see or hear something that sets off those Watergate warning bells in their head. Everyone knows about Watergate, thankfully, and we criticize and scrutinize Presidents because of it, which is not necessarily a bad thing.
Part 9:I definitely see parallels between Watergate and the current news in Washington today. I dare say that Washington today is worse than the Watergate scandal ever was. For example, while President Nixon put on a front and kept his comments of “the press is the enemy” to the secrets of the Oval Office, President Trump talks about his hatred of the press openly in press conferences for the American public to see. It is dangerous and scary, and those warning bells I previously mentioned? They are blaring in my head and I would be a fool to ignore them. Even the scandals in Washington today and Watergate resemble each other. While Nixon had the break in of the Democratic headquarters, Trump has the alleged ties to Russia concerning the election.
Part 1
ReplyDeleteI learned that being a journalist and trying to get a good story can be a pain. You chase down many different leads and deal with people that don’t want to even give you 5 minutes of their time. I have learned that you should check out every story by multiple sources and your editors to get anything posted. It’s a hassle to be a journalist and working for a newspaper and I believe if you’re a nosy person, you would be good at being a journalist. However, you have to nosy for the right information, otherwise being a journalist is meaningless if you aren’t giving the people actual news.
Part 2
I learned that if you can make 2 things connect in any sort of way, it can become a story. The quote “Fake it, till you make it” applies to reporters all over because the person you are interviewing might slip and give you information that you didn’t have before, but as a reporter you should act like you already have the information and you are just confirming whatever info you do have. Nothing really surprised me about being a reporter, you just must be persistent and not give up.
Part 3
I think they make a great team, they both are hungry for the truth. Both feed off each other, every bit of information they have is shared to create a news story for the people. Bernstein after talking to the woman that worked for CREEP has so much information and Woodward helped him sort through and come together with a story to feed to their editor. They connected the dots and linked every little thing they had together. Both worked together to put the pieces to the puzzle together without realizing what they had stumbled upon.
Part 4
Ben Bradlee was the executive editor for the newspaper Woodward and Bernstein worked for. Before Woodward and Bernstein could publish anything on their story, the story had to go through Ben Bradlee. I found Bradlee to be a guy that needed straight facts and the story needed to have no holes in it. He oversaw the publication of the whole Watergate scandal and I also find him as someone who likes to challenge the government and people.
Part 5
I think that journalism now doesn’t have journalist scouring everywhere to provide news. A lot of the news is just gathered in one place and is left for the audience to make sense of it. The news is accessible by everyone and anyone, but it comes down to the people wanting to know and educate themselves. Watergate inspired a lot of people to be journalist, to be curious and always question things and hunt down the story, but now journalism consists of gathering information all together into one place and let the users access it. The digital age has influenced journalism in a huge way.
Part 6
I think they were right to pursue the story the way they did. They understood that something wasn’t right here and pursued the story persistently to get all the right information for their story. Ethics comes into play when questioning the journalists integrity and I think that the journalists chased this story down ethically.
Part 7
They are 2 iconic journalists. They influenced many to become journalists and impact society by providing the people with the information they need. They helped shaped America for what it is today, if they never chased down the Watergate story we could very well be living in a different America today.
Part 8
I think it has made the society question the government more. More people are involved in politics today because they understand what could happen if they people don’t question things.
Part 9
I do see parallels. I see how the government is undermining the media and limiting the media’s access, which blind sides the society. The news is the eyes and ears for all Americans and we know about all the conspiracies and questionable government involvement in many cases is known to us because of the journalists.
Part 1 — What did you learn about newspapers and journalism from watching the film?
ReplyDeleteIf the newspaper is well recognized and trustful, the company needs to very carefully check all information before an article will be published. Even if an article seems to be fascinating without trustful sources, it will be sent to trash. Newspapers management is a very responsible job. If journalists write false, the newspaper may have a lot of troubles and receive lawsuits. What is more, they may lose their readers. I learned that sometimes journalists have to break the rules if they want to achieve better aim. Journalists need to be brave, persistence and hard working. Sometimes they devote their time about one issue several months to seek the truth.
Part 2 — What did you learn about how reporters do their jobs? What surprised you?
Reporters need to have a variety of skills not only writing or good communication. They have to be also good detectives and psychologists. The creativity and persistence are also significant. Sometimes they bend some social norms to achieve their goals. For example, in the movie, they visited the women and manipulate her to confirm their assumption. I was surprised that reporters faster discovered the truth than FBI.
Part 3 — What is your impression of Woodward and Bernstein? Include a discussion of their tactics/methods.
Both they present different characters. Bob Woodward is nice and ambitious but less experience. Bernstein is insistent, well-experienced and self-confident.
They are very creative, persistence and sometimes even intrusive. They totally devote themselves for this case. Characters work a lot, even during nights, to solve the Watergate secret. Sometimes they break social norms to discover truth. They manipulate witnesses and use some trick to get information. For example, they frequently visit a woman to gain information about money even if they expose her to unpleasant consequences. But mostly in their articles, they try to protect witnesses identity, and they didn’t describe the sources. They didn’t confess who is exactly “Deep Throat.” Probably it would be easier to solve Watergate secret if they attached the names of intervieewes, but they were faithful and reliable.
Part 4 — What is your impression of Ben Bradlee? What was his importance to this story?
He is one of my best character in this movie. Ben Bradlee was responsible for the content, which will be presented in Washington Post Newspaper. He was very demanding toward their workers, but he supported them. He emphasized how important is to trust and believe his employees even he didn’t like to rely on anyone. What is more, when the government denied all information concerning Watergate affair, and he received a lot of lawsuits, he decided to stand for his journalists which required great courage.
Part 5 — How have methods of journalism changed since Watergate?
Journalism becomes more investigation rather than the only report. Journalists are more inquisitive after Watergate. They are looking for interesting issues, and they use a different method to gain information. Instead of creating small insignificant stories journalists may devote more time to prepare better one but longer and more relevant article. The most important methods is a creativity how to possess information but minimize harm as much as possible at the same time. Journalism is more important for citizens because they insightful pay attention what government says and does.
Part 6 — Was the Washington Post right to pursue the story the way it did? Why or why not? How did ethics come into play?
ReplyDeleteIt is a very difficult question. On the one hand, they broke a lot of rules. They used tricks to gain unavailable documents; they manipulated witnesses. On the contrary, they had good intentions. They wanted to find the truth and uncover dishonest president conduct. I think it would be probably impossible to discover it without use extra aims, which weren’t completely ethics. However, in my opinion mainly they based on ethical journalism.
-they seek the truth (they tried to uncover secret about president's fraud),
-they minimize harm (they protected witnesses’ identity, but they manipulate them to gain information),
-they act independently (they didn’t have any benefits to slander President),
- they were accountable and transparent ( they wanted to show abnormalities in government, they clearly present what they were standing for).
Part 7 — What effect have Woodward and Bernstein had on journalism and society?
Woodward and Bernstein gave a good example that if we are inquisitive and motivate we can change our culture and discover the real important issue. What is more, they didn’t have any advanced technology and large groups of coworkers. They had only ambition, a piece of paper and pencil. Journalists may and should uncover truth and influence to people life conditions. After Watergate journalists became more searchers than only event descriptors. They are more responsible for seeking the truth which is necessary for our society.
Part 8 — What has been the effect of the Watergate story on society?
In my opinion, after Watergate, people’s trust in government dramatically decreased. Now public figures can’t feel with impunity because journalist may discover their evil deeds.
Furthermore, media became critical aspects of people's life. It stands for seeking the truth. Media influence grows up on society. After these events, media more pay attention what politics do and they provide own investigations.
Part 9 — Do you see parallels between Watergate and what's going on in Washington today? Explain why or why not.
I notice some parallels. The main similarity is that both presidents Nixon and Trump try to diminish the importance of media and accuse it about falsehood. They blame media for their own failures and lies. Both Washington Post and news media now, they keep an eye on what President and government do to protect citizens from public frauds.
Part 1 —I learned that it takes a process to write the truth and still something valuable to report. And I realized that to be a good journalist, you really need to have a passion. It is a lot of work to deal with people to collect the right information and confirmation.
ReplyDeletePart 2 — I was surprised that how closely they approach to those politicians. At the same time, it can put the journalists in a risky situation. If it is the same in the real world as well, it surprised me that they work literally 24/7. Their life is journalism,
Part 3 —My impression about them was that they stick with the truth throughout the entire time. This fact even made me feel like as if they are police officers to look for criminals. One of the tactic that I remember is the one they acted like they know the truth and let the lady speak about it.
Part 4 — His job was basically a decision maker. Like Megan said, he was kind of playing the role of gatekeeper as he decides what to put on the newspaper. He gradually became more supportive for Woodward and Bernstein.
Part 5 — In my opinion, Watergate case inspired young journalists. I believe that it even made people think that journalists can really influence or change something.
Part 6 — Yes, I think they handled it right. And in the film, I could tell that when there is even a little bit of doubt, they always tried to dig till they are sure that they have the right information.
Part 7 — As I already mentioned, they really inspired other good journalists and they definitely were encouragement. Also, they showed us what is the ethical journalism and right thing to go as journalists. They made me believe that medias are not enemy of citizens, but could be an enemy of people like in the movie who was doing something unethical or wrong. Those good journalists strive to seek for the truth.
Part 8 — I think it caught more attention and curiosity about the society. At the same time, it could create more doubtful mind of people about the society.
Part 9 — Yes. I feel like the journalists today is not being active seekers like the ones we watched in the film. And those newspapers are more controlled by the government nowadays.
Part 1: Journalism is not as easy as I thought it would be. After watching the movie I realized it is a lot harder than we think. Having the trouble of getting the information from people, being the first to put it out to society and making sure its accurate. Being an credible source also makes Journalism tough due to accuracy of your work.
ReplyDeletePart 2: I learned that reports jobs are difficult. Trying to come up with an accurate story seems extremely tough, because no information can be left out. What surprised me is that quoting people and getting someone to go on record is harder than you think.
Part 3: Woodward and Bernstein made a great team by making the other think more critical. They made the stories line up before finalizing the puzzle to their newspaper. When they went over to the women's house and drank so much coffee until he got all the information he needs shows determination and precision. "By any means necessary"
Part 4: Having a boss like Ben Bradlee is wonderful, because it allows you to know someone is behind you. Knowing that someone trust you allows you to have full confidence in your story. His importance was him allowing them to publish or not and if he didn't the story wouldn't have been published.
Part 5: The methods for Journalism has changed because now society requires a source. Back then people believed any news put out, but now most people are curious to know where it came from.
Part 6: The way they pursed the story was good because they were always following the code of ethics. Allowing each individual to tell what they wanted and then put all the pieces together and confirmed it with them also.
Part 7: The journalist shows us a prime example of what a trusted journalist is. The followed the code of ethics and told only facts. They allowed themselves to pick out false information and put all the stories together to make sense.
Par 8: The Watergate story has changed the way society views the government. We realized that we must keep an eye on what they are doing and why they are doing it unless they will scam us as citizens.
Part 9: I see parallels. Trying to keep society from watching what is going on so they can do things under the table without being caught. The only source to the government is the press and without the press questioning the government then things would be in their favor.
Part 1: I learned that it is important for journalists to dig deep into information and sources to get the story. It is also important for journalists to not just take people's words on things on whether something is true or false. It is up to them to find out what is true or false.
ReplyDeletePart 2: I learned that reporters have to go all over the place to get a story. They have to dig deep into conversations and people are not always willing to expose a story by helping reporters get accurate information. People often do not want to be exposed themselves and the often will say anything to keep the attention off a subject if they fear they are to be exposed. It can be dangerous at times because a good reporter is often willing to go to extreme lengths to get a story.
Part 3: They made a good team in this movie. Both worked on behalf of each other to get information. They were very good at giving the impression that they already knew something in order to get people talking. Sometimes through out the movie they often knew parts of something but in order to fill in the blanks they made the people they were talking to feel comfortable talking to them which in turn made those people open up to them with information they needed.
Part 4: He was the editor in chief- Woodward and Bernstein's boss. He is the one that said if an article would run or not. If he had not believed in them the proper people would not have been exposed and the story would not have been published.
Part 1 — I learned that in the newspaper and reporting process, you have to have all your facts and sources checked constantly. You need to have all your ducks in a row and make sure you are good enough to publish.
ReplyDeletePart 2 — I learned that back then, reporters could do what is necessary to write their story. There are little tricks to live by and guidelines to follow. I was surprised when Bernstein faked a phone call to the receptionist in order to enter Mr. Dardis's office.
Part 3 — I enjoyed the both men when watching and learning about them. I liked the lengths they would go to get their story heard. The method I enjoyed the most from them was using the phone lines and have Woodward speak to the individuals with Bernstein writing down the conversations word for word. The scene where Bernstein goes to a woman's house and drinks coffee for 6 hours, just so he can get her story.
Part 4 — To me, Ben Bradlee did not seem like a nice guy. He seemed like he hated the duo but gave them the chance anyway. When prompted on what he was doing in the film in actuality, my impression of him changed slightly. I understood that he had some faith in him, but would not show it too often.
Part 5 — People reading the newspaper nowadays don't like anonymous sources anymore. They believe it to be a false story if they see "anonymous"anywhere. So there has to be a confirmed source in stories.
Part 6 — How did ethics come into play?n The way the Washington Post went about writing their story was pretty good and still ended up successful. The ethics were carefully contributed and helped in the case of giving the people their words after being silenced.
Part 7 — Woodstein made the media peak in interest. They gave a voice and aided in bringing down a large chain of events that would harm the public.
Part 8 — Watergate has opened up many books of curiosity. The public fears and distrusts the government. People disagree with the president and get suspicious that they are all up to no good.
Part 9 — There is a parallel with today's government and presidency. There are dismissals and refusal to comment. Denial and anger have continued throughout as well.
Part 5: journalism has changed from watergate because fake news is more common today. Therefore it is more important to have facts in stories rather than leads. Reporters have to really check their sources and fact check all of information that is put out into the media today. After watergate journalists became more willing to find out the dirty truth about stories and go to further lengths to expose what needed to.
ReplyDeletePart 6: yes they were right. They did not settle with any information they were given they continued to dig and confirm information. In the aspect of ethics they broke a lot of ethical rules. They did pretty much whatever they had to do as far as manipulating people and gathering unauthorized information in order to uncover the story. However they did keep the identity of deep throat a secret for many years which did give them some ethical credibility.
Part 7: they gave journalists the confidence to go to more extreme lengths in order to uncover stories. There wasn't a lot of ways such as social media for reporters to get information back then like there is today they had to go get the story which in turn has given journalists today the willingness to do so in today's journalism.
Part 1- After watching the film, I learned that journalists have to dig for the truth. We often take newspapers and reporters for granted and we don't think about the amount of time and effort it takes to gather all of the information to make the stories we read.
ReplyDeletePart 2- I learned that reporting is not easy. Even though not all reporters are as dedicated as the journalists in the film, many do work hard and don't get credit for it. I enjoyed seeing the "behind the scenes" work that was shown in the film. I rarely think about all of the interviews and detective work that building a story requires.
Part 3- I was very impressed with Woodward and Bernstein. If they had the amount of integrity in real life as the amount that was shown in the film, then I have a great amount of respect for them. They dedicated their time to digging for the truth despite all of the risks and they came out on top.
Part 4- My impression of Ben Bradlee was that he wasn't confident in Woodward and Bernstein's work, but he let them anyway. I thought he had a lot of doubt while discussing the story with them and didn't fully want them to pursue it.
Part 5- I think integrity has decreased since Watergate. In the film, the journalists found the truth and wrote the story, but put the work in to dig for answers. Now, journalists forget to slow down and find the truth. Many find one piece of evidence then take it and twist it to make it into a story.
Part 6- In my opinion, there was nothing wrong with the way the Washington Post pursued the story. They found pieces of evidence, then put the puzzle together to form a true story. They interviewed the people they needed to and upheld a code of ethics in the process.
Part 7/8- I think they showed society a part of people they didn't know existed. People too often trust and go along with what people above them say and do. Bernstein and Woodward showed them to dig for answers and question information. I think the Watergate story has allowed society to think differently about people with power.
Part 9- I see parallels between journalists wanting to question people with power like they did during Watergate. I also see the people with power resisting and pushing journalists back. They just have to keep searching and testing the power.
Part 8: the watergate story exposed a lot of sketchiness that was going on in Washington. It uncovered reasons to not trust everything that comes from the White House and just how far people will go to keep the truth hidden in order to cover their own hide.
ReplyDeletePart 9: I definitely see parallels between the two. Nixon did whatever and said whatever he could to keep the heat off of himself. I think if it came down to it trump would do the very same. There were many false statements made by Nixon which has also been true for trump as well. Trump has already been accused of altering the law on his own behalf. Nixon was also guilty of this during the watergate scandal. But like the Washington post during watergate, the media today continues to try and expose trumps falsifications.
GO TO LIBRARY
ReplyDelete1. From the movie, I saw how chaotic journalism is. It isn't just sitting down and writing anything, but about being dedicated to your work and informing the public with the facts and doing just about anything to do so. Journalist must acquire traits like self-determination, dedication, and patience.
2. Reporters do their jobs all the time, continuously gathering information. They know how and what to say when working with people. It took more than one attempt to get a story right as well. Reporters never expected to have their story perfect the first draft. What surprised me the most was the work atmosphere. I felt like there was so much going on at once, but it was normal to the reporters.
3. Bob Woodard was very hardworking. He never gave up even when he came to continuous dead ends. When none of the employees were answering them, he wanted to restart from the beginning. Carl Bernstein was much more persuasive, i feel. This was most evident when he would not leave the woman's home. He kept asking her questions in different ways to get his answers. Bernstein was just the right amount of pushy, he seemed to get what he wanted.
4. Ben Bradlee always had faith in Bernstein and Woodard, even when no one else did. He believed in their stories and their ability to break it. He came to their defense when the other employees talked down upon them. I feel like if it weren't for him, their stories would have been dropped and Watergate would have never happened.
5. I feel like since Watergate, public figures are watched more carefully. It made citizens want to know more about what was going on in the government & politics. People care more about what they are doing so a lot of journalism is surrounded around them. I also feel like journalist interpret the truth more closely afterwards as well. Which means they hold people against what they say.
6. I feel like the Washington Post had every right, mostly because it was the president. This was a big story and it had to be broken by any means necessary, ethically. I feel as if they were all ethical. Although, there were some moments where they "tricked" information out of some people.
7. I feel as if Woodward and Bernstein gave many people the desire to peruse journalism. It showed society that they could trust journalism.
8. Watergate had a huge impact. It ruined the trust between the government and the American people. It made citizens question what was really going on and what did they not know. Journalist also watch public figures more carefully.
9. I
1. I learned that journalism back then is completely different from journalism now but both in a bad and good way. Bad, because not all journalists do not abide by the Code of Ethics for professional journalism that every journalist should follow. Good, because the new generation of journalist already have the power to change the course of the future not only for ourselves but for generations to come if only we recognize it and use it to the best of our ability as one nation. I also learned that the hunger of journalist back then was much more savage than today because of the way they had to obtain all of their information. After finding one clue the excitement and hunger had driven both Woodward and Bernstein to keep digging. In today’s society with technology making information so easy to find I believe that it has made our generation a tad bit lazy on having the hunger to go out and actually search for information.
ReplyDelete2.A couple of things I saw that reporters did back then that I feel like doesn't happen much in today’s society is when a source wants to stay anonymous they still get reveled about the information that they gave to the reporter. In the movie "deep throat" stayed anonymous until he himself wanted to be known. Not even Woodward's boss knew who he was. The fact that he stayed anonymous for that long was the most surprising thing out of the entire film. Another surprising thing that I saw was the patience that Woodward and Bernstein had throughout the whole process even when it seemed to look like there was no story. And not even when it look as if there wasn't going to be a story, even the amount of paper work they had to search through in order to find the next clue if it was there. Their determination is what surprised me.
3. My impression of both Woodward and Bernstein was nothing but positivity. From the way they handled the task at which they were on to the persistence and courageousness they had in facing their very own government. Not only the way they went about the process the tactics and methods they had used to get the information they needed to make a story. One particular scene in the movie that I really liked was when Bernstein did whatever he could to get information out of a source but without being too straight forward with his questions. After a dozen cups of coffee he got the job done and ecstatically went to his partner Woodward with all the bits of information that was received. With the initials of names given to Bernstein he and Woodward used reverse psychology to get the full names of the individuals that were involved or being paid by the re-elect team of Nixon. Sticking to the journalism code of ethics Woodward and Bernstein displayed and stood on those principles till the very end.
4. My impression of Ben Bradly "Big Boss" the Executive Editor of The Washington Post at the time was also nothing but positivity except for one scene in the movie where he was about to take Woodward off the Watergate case. He had to be reminded back to when he was a young upcoming journalist trying to make his on lane in the journalistic business. His importance in the film I believe was crucial but not breaking news importance. Every major newspaper will major credibility will need a head person in charge and that's exactly who Ben Bradly was. Other than that I believe he was played a great Executive Editor of The Washington Post.
5. Methods of journalism have definitely changed since the whole Watergate incident. I believe the main thing that has changed is the way some journalist go about doing "journalistic" work. As much as the journalism world would love to be filled with a bunch of Woodward and Bernstein's in a realistic society it will never be that way. Since the Watergate bust I believe that we have moved even further from the Code of Ethics for a journalist.
ReplyDelete6. Yes most definitely, I believe The Washington Post did exactly what a credited newspaper agency should do when there is corruption that needs to be exploited. It’s sad that even back then there was corruption within our own government just for the liking of one person. President Nixon didn't just want to win the presidential election for a second consecutive time he wanted to win the presidential election that would put him down in history as the first elected president to win more than majority of the Nations votes. When you have that many people believing in you to protect them from both foreign and domestic policy it’s only right to keep up with the man in charge and his every action even the actions that no one is supposed to know about. The Washington Post fought for its citizens when its president wasn't. Lying to the nation isn't protecting. With every bit of information that unraveled by Woodward and Bernstein the ethics of The Washington Post were displayed perfectly. They checked and re-checked and sometimes even re re-checked not only the information but also the individuals who had given them the information. The Washington Post didn't move too fast neither too slow on discovering the corruption of the government at that particular time. If it wasn't for The Washington Post hiring the two men that potentially saved this nation who knows how Nixon's second term could have ended.
7. Back then, Woodward and Bernstein had a powerful influence as well as an effect on society and journalism because of their courageousness. The ethics that they displayed was needed then and more than ever needed now. The problem with this society compared the society that both Woodward and Bernstein were in is that there is a lot more distractions. Back then there were indeed distractions that could've altered the careers of the young journalist but the ethics of their character stood firm and for that a important piece of this nation was exposed. The distraction is used against the millennials the same millennials that can change the world if sought after in the right way.
8.I believe that the effect that Watergate has had on society is that we cannot always lean on our Commander and Chief to always make the best decisions for us because those same decisions may not better what's best for the people. Seeing that even the most powerful man well at least to the people the most powerful man can also have secrets makes journalism then, now, and in the future more important than ever before. There is still hope for a corrupted nation it’s up to the young individuals to get their peers on board to fight the corruption of this world.
9. Yessssssssss, I definitely see history repeating itself especially when the individual who holds the chair of presidency brings up the Watergate situation and try to compare his presidency to Nixon's. The only difference I see between both Presidents is that ex-president Nixon had political experience. The people actually liked Richard Nixon. As for Donald Trump only the ignorant likes the man. The educated can’t believe that he's gotten thus far into his presidency. Although he still remains as president all the talk about wiretapping, relationships with Russia interfering with the election, to him (trying) to put the people against their very own journalism/media providers shows that he is still even after 100 days incapable of running a country. I do believe impeachment is underway as far as when it will happen, well I guess we all will just have to wait and see how it plays out.
1. what i learned about journalism from watching this movie is that good journalists are very serious about their job and are willing to take risk to be great. The characters put their life on the line for this story.
ReplyDelete2. I didn't know reporters had to travel the country to get more information about their stories. They took real risks. It surprised me how serious reporting is.