What is the real history behind the "Washington Post"?

Valentina 2021-12-02 08:01:26

Note: This article was first published in OPEN

When Spielberg announced that he would collaborate with Tom Hanks and Meryl Streep on a film about the "Pentagon Documents", everyone's eyes focused on them. Yes, as Hollywood's premier director, an actor with an "American conscience", and possibly the best acting actress in Hollywood history, such a film immediately became a deserved award from the announcement of the project. The top seed of the season.

As we all know, the discussion of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution triggered by the leak of the "Pentagon Document" and the final redefinition of the role of the media in the "New York Times v. The moment when media relations are anxious has extraordinary significance. However, when Spielberg completed the film at an incredible speed and finally unveiled it, we discovered that the film was indeed reasonable and unexpected. What appeared in the center of the film was not the "New York Times" who played a central role in the "Pentagon Documents" leak, but their competitor, the "Washington Post." The subsequent development made us understand why this film focused on the story of this "following the trend" media. It turned out that at the same time as the leak of the "Pentagon Documents", the "Washington Post" was preparing to go public. Therefore, in addition to the political pressure brought by such a sensitive news report, the Washington Post is also facing pressure from capital. These two pressures have made the "Washington Post" a perfect representative of the troubled media, providing an excellent entry point for such an apparently "fourth power" ode.

On the other hand, at this time, the publisher of the "Washington Post" also happened to be a woman: Catherine Graham. Catherine’s father, the famous financier Eugene Meyer, bought the Washington Post in 1933, and Catherine’s husband Philip Graham took over in 1946. However, after Philip committed suicide in 1963, the 46-year-old Catherine had to take up this burden and became the only female publisher at the time. After the "Washington Post" successfully went public, Catherine became the CEO of the only Fortune 500 company. In 1987, it was during Catherine's exclusive interview with Chiang Ching-kuo that Chiang Ching-kuo announced the lifting of Taiwan's martial law. It can be said that Catherine's influence on the "Washington Post" is huge. In the film, Catherine not only faces the political pressure of the White House and the capital pressure of investors, but also the potential pressure of the society on female professionals at the time. Therefore, whether it is the current "#metoo movement", or Hillary Clinton, who almost succeeded in breaking the "glass ceiling" of the highest political power in the United States in 2016, it is undoubtedly the best to portray Catherine Graham as the protagonist of the film. "Just in time".

It is precisely because of the above reasons, even if the first to excavate the "Pentagon Documents" was the "New York Times", even if the "New York Times" won the 1972 Pulitzer Outstanding Public Service Award for its coverage of the "Pentagon Documents," even if it eventually hits The name of the case that went to the U.S. Supreme Court was "New York Times Co. v. United States" (New York Times Co. v. United States). The Post's report on the "Pentagon Papers." It is no wonder that the editors and reporters of the "New York Times" are dissatisfied. James Greensfield, who participated in the report at the time, expressed his anger, calling the content of the film "unbelievable" and even considered it "theft". At the time, "The New York Times" legal counsel James Goodale also used "theft" to describe the film. Max Frankel, the director of the Washington branch of The New York Times, thought it was a "stupid" work[1].

If the film focuses on the "Pentagon Documents" leaks and focuses on secondary roles in history, only the perspective is different, then the film's shaping of then President Richard Nixon is even more debatable. In the film, President Nixon played almost the role of a typical conspirator who could not be more typical. The audience could not see his face from beginning to end, but could only see him from the back of the White House through the window, and listened to how he gave instructions to "New York The Times and The Washington Post carried out suppression. Such a portrayal of President Nixon can hardly cause anyone to have even a trace of empathy for him.

However, the real President Nixon in history actually acquiesced in his initial attitude towards the "Pentagon Document Leakage Case". Because the content in the "Pentagon Document" is an investigation into the actions of the Kennedy administration and the Johnson administration in the Vietnam War, and the time involved was completely before Nixon came to power. The publication of this document can just show the catastrophic mistakes of the two Democratic administrations during the Vietnam War and the lies they lied to the American people. For Nixon, who promised to end the Vietnam War during the election campaign, implemented the so-called "Vietnamization" policy of replacing the U.S. military with Vietnamese troops after taking office, and has begun peace talks with North Vietnam, the publication of the "Pentagon Documents" will not harm him. Personal political interests. However, the then Secretary of State Kissinger believed that no matter what the contents of the Pentagon Document were about, such level of leaks would severely hit the authority and credibility of the US government, and would make American allies less confident in the reliability of the United States. In the end, Kissinger successfully persuaded Nixon. Thus, there was a ban on the distribution of the "New York Times" and the "Washington Post" in the film, and the final lawsuit. In fact, the "Paris Peace Agreement" that stopped the Vietnam War was signed in 1973 during Nixon's tenure. It can be said that Nixon ended the Vietnam War.

In addition, in the first half of the film, Ben Bradley, the editor-in-chief of the "Washington Post" played by Hanks, was struggling to find someone for a wedding photo of Nixon's daughter, because the "Washington Post" was not Allow coverage. This incident is purely fictitious. The "Washington Post" did not, as shown in the film, refused to enter the White House to report after the "Pentagon Papers" report, although Nixon did make similar actions after the "Watergate."

For the film's screenwriter and Spielberg, it was too tempting to portray President Nixon as a bad guy with a stereotype. As the only president in American history to resign during his term, it is too easy to discredit him. The “Watergate Incident” during the tenure almost destroyed a generation of Americans’ trust in the government. To this day, the American people are still reluctant to trust the government. And "All the President's Men" about the "Washington Post" investigation of "Watergate" has become an example of describing media films. "Spotlight", which won an Oscar for best picture earlier, and this film The films have stolen a lot of lessons from it. This film is even like the Marvel Cinematic Universe, adding the "Ending Egg" of "Watergate" as if it were the official prequel of "Presidential Team". Therefore, letting Nixon be the villain of this film is a historical tradition.

What is even more tempting comes from the political intentions of the creative team behind the film. Since Donald Trump won the US presidential election, many people have begun to compare him with Nixon. Although the two people are very different in personal images, internal affairs and diplomacy: Nixon is a well-known supporter of the nature conservation movement and passed a series of environmental protection regulations during his tenure; Trump obviously has no interest in environmental protection, not only leading the United States Withdrawal from the "Paris Agreement" aimed at curbing climate change, and overturned various environmental protection policies of the Obama era in just one year; Nixon eased relations with China and the Soviet Union during his tenure, while Trump was unusually diplomatic tough. But for Trump’s opponents, Trump’s "Russian Gate" accusation is undoubtedly comparable to the "Watergate Incident" in which Nixon tried to use illegal means to win the 1972 presidential election for himself. And Nixon was impeached by Congress and eventually had to resign. Trump's opponents liked it. For this film, Nixon’s suppression of the media mirrors Trump’s current hostility to the mainstream media.

In addition, the film has a detail that is noteworthy but easily overlooked. When Katherine Graham and editor-in-chief Ben Bradlee (Ben Bradlee) were deciding whether to publish the news, both of them realized their negligence in the previous Kennedy and Johnson era: back then, they had been with Kennedy and Johnson. Maintaining good personal relationships and frequent parties held in and out of the White House has resulted in the president, who holds the power, becoming a good friend rather than an object of supervision. In fact, it was after the leak of the "Pentagon Documents" that the American media really formed a certain antagonistic relationship with the government, and the media's role as the "fourth power" became more and more prominent. However, the "honeymoon relationship" they had with Kennedy and Johnson back then is really gone forever?

In the current sharp confrontation between the White House and the mainstream media, many conservatives have also begun to accuse the media of treating Trump and Obama differently. An article in The Atlantic Monthly as early as 2013 was titled "Why the media treat Obama so mildly?"[2]. CNN anchor Jack Tapper also admitted in an interview with "Rolling Stone" magazine that because of the more supportive attitude of the media, Obama is sometimes not responsible for the lies he tells [3]. So does the Obama administration cooperate with reporters in the same way?

In fact, an article in the "New York Times" pointed out that during Obama's eight-year term, the Obama administration used the Espionage Act to prosecute whistleblower as many as 9 times, more than all his predecessors combined. The Obama administration also used the Department of Justice and the FBI to eavesdrop on specific reporters, and used subpoenas to force these reporters to confess their informants. The article quoted Leonard Downie, a former senior editor of the Washington Post, as saying that the Obama administration’s crackdown on government leaks and control of information was “the toughest since the Nixon administration” [4]. Interestingly, this article was published on December 30, 2016, when Obama was about to leave office.

Undoubtedly, Obama, who is young and energetic and holds a progressive view, is obviously more likely to be loved by the media, and a good relationship with the White House can help the media gain a lot of sweetness. Perhaps, facing the "aggressive" Trump, the media, like Bradley and Graham in the film, realized that the media should not be friends with the government, but should be held accountable to the government.

Taken together, the "Washington Post" film is obviously a drunkard's intention not to drink. Perhaps it is precisely because of such undisguised criticism of the current politics that this film gathers Spielberg, Hanks, Streep, and the familiar faces of current TV dramas, plus Spielber. Ge's own gold medal team behind the scenes was coldly received at the 90th Oscars that just ended and left empty-handed. And this year’s Oscar-topped "The Shape of Water", although it is also about a story of various disadvantaged groups uniting and defeating evil, which is obviously relevant to the present, but its fairytale-like romantic tone is obviously better than the impatient " The Washington Post is more in line with the essence of Hollywood dreams.

Notes:

[1]Columbia Journalism Review: Hell hath no fury like The New YorkTimes scorned by Hollywood https://www.cjr.org/the_feature/tom-hanks-meryl-streep-new-york-times-washington-post.php

[2]The Atlantic: Why Does the Media Go Easy on Barack Obama? https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/02/why-does-the-media-go-easy-on-barack- obama/272807/

[3]Rolling Stone: The Last Word: Jake Tapper on Trump,'SNL' and Old-School Rap https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/features/cnn-anchor-jake-tapper-trump-snl-old -school-rap-the-last-word-w496978

[4]New York Times: If Donald Trump Targets Journalists, Thank Obama https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/30/opinion/sunday/if-donald-trump-targets-journalists-thank-obama.html

View more about The Post reviews

Extended Reading

The Post quotes

  • Robert McNamara: If you publish, you'll get the very worst of him, the Colsons and the Ehrlichmans and he'll crush you.

    Kay Graham: I know, he's just awful, but I...

    Robert McNamara: [Interrupting and getting extremely angry] He's a... Nixon's a son of a bitch! He hates you, he hates Ben, he's wanted to ruin the paper for years and you will not get a second chance, Kay. The Richard Nixon I know will muster the full power of the presidency and if there's a way to destroy your paper, by God, he'll find it.

  • Roger Clark: What if we wait? What if we hold off on printing today. Instead we call the Attorney General and we tell them that we intend to print on Sunday. That way we give them and us time to figure out the legality of all of it, while the Court in New York decides the Times case.

    Ben Bradlee: Are you suggesting we alert the Attorney General to the fact that we have these documents, that we're going to print, in a few days?

    Roger Clark: Well, yes, that is the idea.

    Ben Bagdikian: Yeah, well, outside of landing the Hindenburg in a lightning storm, that's about the shittiest idea I've ever heard.

    Fritz Beebe: Oh boy!