MaxedOutMama
Friday, October 22, 2004
Spiegel Interview with Ben Bradlee
I found this interview very interesting. As you know, I've been trying to give a little taste of German concerns and press coverage here. I couldn't find this Spiegel Online article in English, so I translated it quickly. This isn't polished but it is accurate:
From Der Spiegel, October 21st
Interview With Watergate Legend Bradlee
As Head Editor of the Washington Post, Ben Bradlee revealed Richard Nixon's lies about Watergate and forced the American president to step down. In an interview with Spiegel Online, Bradlee invites his colleagues to likewise unrelentingly pursue George W. Bush. (literally, pursue should be harry or encircle)
Spiegel Online:
In 1974 you hunted the liar Nixon out of the White House. Was that a lesson for politicians to stay closer to the truth?
Bradlee:
Unfortunately, politicians are still lying. Basically, I believe no statement from Washington. Take the proposition that one can not talk of this or that due to national security; in 90 percent of the cases politicians use this as camouflage to cloak the genuine story. I have often asked myself why politicians lie so much. The most important reason always seems to be that they want to spin, they want to whitewash their mistakes. Happily it doesn't necessarily work - sometimes the truth comes out anyway.
Spiegel Online:
But mostly it takes a while.
Bradlee:
Unfortunately often with horrible consequences. Think about Lyndon B. Johnson and his dramatic speech about the alleged Vietnamese attack on the US battleship in the Gulf of Tonkin. Over that he got war powers from Congress in 1964. If the voters had known then that the attack had never taken place, so many men could still be alive. And our country would never have lost its trust in politicians so completely.
Spiegel Online:
Isn't the press also guilty? Almost all of the American media, even the Washington Post, recoiled from calling Bush a liar on account of the Iraqi war.
Bradlee:
Oh, I felt they should call him a liar very clearly in headline stories. There were in the meantime editorials regarding weapons of mass destruction that went nearly that far. But as journalists we are reluctant to call someone a liar. During Watergate we knew that the Nixon administration was lying to our faces. We could therefore write: "Richard Nixon explained today he could not discuss Watergate because of national security concerns. This is a lie." Nonetheless it made me uneasy. US reporters want to report objectively, not to judge. We rely on the the truth coming out piece by piece.
Spiegel Online:
But certainly the Washington Post and the New York Times seem to feel a bit guilty. Both papers have apologized for being too uncritical in the reporting of the Iraqi war.
Bradlee:
Certainly they were too slow. They relied on the explanations of the administration for too long. And naturally the Republicans were skillful at burying every critical news report under a wave of patriotism.
Spiegel Online:
In such a climate it requires more courage and support to call a lie a lie.
Bradlee:
If you, as a US journalist, tangle with the well-connected religious right, you have real problems. And you also have a research problem. It was simple to call Bill Clinton a liar about the Lewinsky scandal, because it was obvious. For Bush one had to research the matter. There are thousands of newspapers in the USA, but most publishers provide no money for in-depth reporting. At the Washington Post Katherine Graham, the publisher, still supported Watergate reporters Bob Woodward, Carl Bernstein and me, even as the White House threatened to destroy our publisher.
Spiegel Online:
Will politicians continue to come out with lies?
Bradlee:
It has to be more difficult for them. Society has become far more mistrustful in the last decades - due to Vietnam and Watergate. Also due to equal rights; women who now work in leading positions in business or the media won't cooperate with the secretiveness and lies of men.
Spiegel Online:
But how will that be reflected in critical reporting?
Bradlee:
Above all, because of Watergate many more shrewd, critical people went into journalism. They have to pull themselves together and do their homework: Why is he telling me this? Is it actually true? How will I find independent sources to check it out?
From Der Spiegel, October 21st
Interview With Watergate Legend Bradlee
As Head Editor of the Washington Post, Ben Bradlee revealed Richard Nixon's lies about Watergate and forced the American president to step down. In an interview with Spiegel Online, Bradlee invites his colleagues to likewise unrelentingly pursue George W. Bush. (literally, pursue should be harry or encircle)
Spiegel Online:
In 1974 you hunted the liar Nixon out of the White House. Was that a lesson for politicians to stay closer to the truth?
Bradlee:
Unfortunately, politicians are still lying. Basically, I believe no statement from Washington. Take the proposition that one can not talk of this or that due to national security; in 90 percent of the cases politicians use this as camouflage to cloak the genuine story. I have often asked myself why politicians lie so much. The most important reason always seems to be that they want to spin, they want to whitewash their mistakes. Happily it doesn't necessarily work - sometimes the truth comes out anyway.
Spiegel Online:
But mostly it takes a while.
Bradlee:
Unfortunately often with horrible consequences. Think about Lyndon B. Johnson and his dramatic speech about the alleged Vietnamese attack on the US battleship in the Gulf of Tonkin. Over that he got war powers from Congress in 1964. If the voters had known then that the attack had never taken place, so many men could still be alive. And our country would never have lost its trust in politicians so completely.
Spiegel Online:
Isn't the press also guilty? Almost all of the American media, even the Washington Post, recoiled from calling Bush a liar on account of the Iraqi war.
Bradlee:
Oh, I felt they should call him a liar very clearly in headline stories. There were in the meantime editorials regarding weapons of mass destruction that went nearly that far. But as journalists we are reluctant to call someone a liar. During Watergate we knew that the Nixon administration was lying to our faces. We could therefore write: "Richard Nixon explained today he could not discuss Watergate because of national security concerns. This is a lie." Nonetheless it made me uneasy. US reporters want to report objectively, not to judge. We rely on the the truth coming out piece by piece.
Spiegel Online:
But certainly the Washington Post and the New York Times seem to feel a bit guilty. Both papers have apologized for being too uncritical in the reporting of the Iraqi war.
Bradlee:
Certainly they were too slow. They relied on the explanations of the administration for too long. And naturally the Republicans were skillful at burying every critical news report under a wave of patriotism.
Spiegel Online:
In such a climate it requires more courage and support to call a lie a lie.
Bradlee:
If you, as a US journalist, tangle with the well-connected religious right, you have real problems. And you also have a research problem. It was simple to call Bill Clinton a liar about the Lewinsky scandal, because it was obvious. For Bush one had to research the matter. There are thousands of newspapers in the USA, but most publishers provide no money for in-depth reporting. At the Washington Post Katherine Graham, the publisher, still supported Watergate reporters Bob Woodward, Carl Bernstein and me, even as the White House threatened to destroy our publisher.
Spiegel Online:
Will politicians continue to come out with lies?
Bradlee:
It has to be more difficult for them. Society has become far more mistrustful in the last decades - due to Vietnam and Watergate. Also due to equal rights; women who now work in leading positions in business or the media won't cooperate with the secretiveness and lies of men.
Spiegel Online:
But how will that be reflected in critical reporting?
Bradlee:
Above all, because of Watergate many more shrewd, critical people went into journalism. They have to pull themselves together and do their homework: Why is he telling me this? Is it actually true? How will I find independent sources to check it out?
