Deep Throat, Watergate and the Media

George C. Landrith

The news that W. Mark Felt was the secret informant, Deep Throat, who helped Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein expose the Watergate scandal couldn’t have come at a better time for the mainstream media. Many journalists have effectively said, “Let’s not talk about the media’s recent failures. Let’s focus on journalist’s role in uncovering Watergate.”

Point well taken. Watergate is a good example of the press performing its watchdog function. But that was over 30 years ago. Is that the most recent example they can give? Even a broken clock is right twice a day. But once every 30 years? In light of the problems at CBS News, the New York Times, Newsweek and the Washington Post, no wonder the media is celebrating its role in Watergate 30 years ago. There is nothing like changing the subject when things are not going well.

The truth is, the mainstream media has largely become anti-American ideologues blinded by their own bias. This may sound harsh, but it is nonetheless true. Here is a quick review of some recent media coverage.

Without a shred of evidence, Newspaper Guild President Linda Foley speaking at a conference accused the U.S. military of targeting and killing journalists. Foley said: “Journalists are not just being targeted verbally or politically. They are also being targeted for real in places like Iraq. What outrages me is that there's not more outrage about the number, and the brutality, and the cavalier nature of the U.S. military toward the killing of journalists in Iraq.”

Earlier, Foley wrote to the White House, “A prompt and convincing response to the questions raised over these deaths will end worldwide speculation that the U.S. targets journalists and the media.” Worldwide speculation? Ms. Foley’s allegation is fanciful and absurdly false. Yet, if you’re a biased and anti-American journalist with an ax to grind, this is the sort of tripe that passes for interesting commentary. Richard J. Roth, a friend and associate of Ms. Foley and a senior associate dean at Northwestern University, called Foley’s allegations “a real puzzler.” No wonder the media would rather talk about Watergate and Woodward and Bernstein.

How about the media’s yawning at liberals who advocate violence against conservatives? John McTighe was suspended from the University of Louisville for this rant to his sociology class where he blamed America’s problems on “religious zealots” who vote “on morals” and suggested, “we should all buy AK47s and shoot them all.”

In February, the media went on a feeding frenzy when U.S. Marine Lt. Gen. James Mattis, who led troops in Afghanistan, said, “It's fun to shoot [terrorists].” Mattis questioned the manhood of terrorists who target and kill unarmed civilians, and women and children. He also said he liked doing his job. But when a college professor suggests violence against Americans who go to church, there is a collective yawn. Why? Bias.

In February, Baltimore Mayor, Martin O’Malley compared President Bush’s budget to the September 11th, terrorist attacks. “Back on September 11th, terrorists attacked ... two of America's great cities,” O’Malley said. “Years later, we are given a budget proposal by our commander in chief, the president of the United States. And with a budget ax, he is attacking America's cities.” The incident was reported, but it blew over almost immediately.

Why is it that when a conservative Senator in off-the-cuff remarks praises the 60-year service of another senator at his 100th birthday party, he is hounded from office by the press? Remember Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott a few years ago saying nice things about Senator Strom Thurmond at his 100 year birthday party? But when an ultra-liberal mayor speaking at a planned press conference compares the sitting President of the United States to terrorists who flew planes into buildings and killed over 3,000 Americans, there was no outrage? Why? Bias.

In May, on the basis of one anonymous source, Newsweek magazine reported that the American military was intimidating Islamic terrorist detainees by flushing the Koran down the toilet. The result was riots in the streets in the Middle East and 17 deaths. The story turned out to be false and was later retracted. Extremists and terrorists will ignore the retraction and U.S. servicemen will bear the brunt for the false story. They say it was an honest mistake. Wrong. It was a biased mistake.

When your perspective is that America is the problem, not the solution, it is easy to believe goofy and unsubstantiated stories that feed your bias. The Koran is a large book. How does one flush a large book down the toilet? And how is this intimidating? Perhaps Newsweek journalists and editors should ask a few more questions before buying into stories that fit their biases, but not the facts.

I don’t actually mind that the mainstream media is painfully biased. Everyone has the right to view the news from his or her own perspective. What annoys me is that they disingenuously deny their bias. I freely acknowledge my perspective when I write or speak. Why can’t the media do the same? If they can’t honestly address their own bias, how can we expect them to honestly present anything else?

Never mind, they’d rather talk about Watergate.

###

Mr. Landrith is a graduate of the University of Virginia School of Law, where he was Business Editor of the Virginia Journal of Law and Politics. He had a successful law practice in business and litigation. In 1994 and 1996, Mr. Landrith was a candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives from Virginia's Fifth Congressional District. He served on the Albemarle County School Board. Mr. Landrith is an adjunct professor at the George Mason School of Law. He is recognized as an authority on constitutional law and jurisprudence, federalism, global warming, and property rights.

george@ff.org