Nicole Runyan
Wake Forest University

Viewing the Watergate Scandal through the Media's Electronic Eyes

     There have been many memorable events in the era after World War Two, from landing on the moon to landing in Grenada. Learning about the myriad events in recent American history has been difficult until the development of electronic media; specifically the World Wide Web. This new form of media allows students and scholars alike to browse the Internet at their leisure and avoid the mundane world that can exist within traditional textbooks. This fresh form of information has great potential, but it is still in a relatively early stage and has many problems that have yet to be resolved. Browsers must be careful in the sites they choose and the facts that are presented. There are currently few regulations about the creation of websites. Anyone can say anything and can claim it as fact. This is not to imply that all electronic information should be immediately disregarded, since there are also many legitimate and well-researched sites... One specific historical area that has a plethora of websites is the Watergate scandal that rocked the Nixon Administration in the early 1970's. The two sites compared in this paper, one by the Washington Post and the other by Time/CNN, were created around the 25th anniversary of the scandal and deal with both past and present perceptions surrounding the incident. They have similarities and differences both in content and design, but are both decent sites that merit evaluation.

     On first glance, the content of each of the sites is moderately comparable. The sources of the information about the Watergate investigation seem to be reasonably credible. The first site was compiled by the Washington Post. There are no specific authors or editors listed, but that does not terribly detract from the validity of the site. The fact that the website was compiled by a nationally trusted newspaper with a high degree of journalistic integrity tends to persuade browsers that the information they read on the site is highly reliable and trustworthy. The Washington Post is also obviously located in the District of Columbia and had close proximity to key sources and leaks when the scandal was just breaking through the Senate Hearings and Nixon's resignation. Readers may easily draw the conclusion that the Washington Post may have been one of the better sources for information during Watergate because of its inside Washington confidants that other national papers may have lacked. Even if the site did not identify exact authors, the browser is led to believe that the overall prestige of the Washington Post is satisfactory enough to make the website verifiable and trustworthy.

     The Time/CNN site goes a step further in verifying sources. This website lists the contributing authors and editors, but does not describe their positions or their affiliation with Time/CNN. They are listed as working for Allpolitics, but there is no explanation of that organization's ties to Time/CNN. This site also uses the same implied qualifications that the Washington Post utilized. The heading clearly illustrates that Time/CNN, and all of its political and journalist connections, were involved in researching and formatting the site… In a final evaluation both sites seems quite credible even though they lacked specific authors or editors, since the media sources that are responsible for the them are nationally well-respected institutions.

     The information presented in each of the sites is rather consistent and well organized in a thematic manner. Both provide detailed historical accounts of the initial burglary at the Watergate Hotel, the cover-up by the Nixon Administration, and the eventual resignation and aftermath that ensued. Both of them have a comprehensive, yet easy-to-read summary of the scandal that is very helpful for browsers who may not have much knowledge about Watergate. The Washington Post site has the brief summary on the first page, whereas the Time/CNN site has an extension heading where the summary is located. Neither is hard to locate and are clearly outlined on the site. The same is true for the other basic headings on the sites, including: key players, illegal actions, Senate Hearings, and legislative reforms that occurred after Nixon's resignation. The Time/CNN website is by far more in-depth than the Washington Post one. It has many more subheadings available to the browser, and each of the subheadings has more background information. However, the Washington Post site does have a chronological timeline that can be easily accessed if the browser is unfamiliar with basic concepts. Overall, the Time/CNN website is more informative, especially for novice browsers. There is more background data available in myriad formsb ranging from cartoons and pictures to recordings of hearings and interviews.

     The abundance of information available on the Time/CNN site goes beyond historical data. This website is the only one that provides insight into the Watergate scandal from a current standpoint. There are headings listed that have polled current opinion about the scandal and the resignation/impeachment of Richard Nixon. There is also information about Nixon's death, and a heading containing a copy of Senator Robert Dole's eulogy at his funeral. Both of these retrospects are lacking on the Washington Post website. This application of the current political climate to a past national crisis gives a definite advantage to the Time/CNN site. It makes the site more interesting and dimensional versus the Washington Post one, which lacks the variety and contemporary evaluation that is present in the Time/CNN site. It is also important to note that even in light of the additional information available on the Time/CNN site, neither site appears to have any subversive intent. There are no explicit biases and both sites are for informational and educational purposes only.

     Initially, both sites are engaging and interesting to browse. There are plenty of headings and other links on each site, from the infamous "Deep Throat" informant to President Gerald Ford's pardon speech. After a few minutes though, it is obvious that the Time/CNN site has much more to offer. There are more interactive options, such as voting on personal opinions about the Watergate scandal. There are also audio clips such as Nixon's resignation speech, Watergate Senate hearings, and a recent interview of Bob Woodward on CNN. There are video clips of the hearings and the browser can pull up cartoons and pictures from Time Magazine issues (1972-74). These options are not nearly as well developed on the Washington Post site. Most of the alternate headings are more text of hearings or transcripts without audio or visual clips. There are generic head shots of key players like Nixon and Agnew interspersed on the site, but it is lacking the variety of audio and visual clips that the Time/CNN site offered. The only real interactive part of the Washington Post site is the option to search for articles (by keyword) that were published during the scandal. However, for someone who does not have much background knowledge, this is not a viable option. But both sites are easy to navigate if the browser is willing to devote some time to reading the text and be patient while all the information is uploading. The Time/CNN site is more advanced due to the wider variety of information and available options, but it is also more interesting and engaging for the same reasons.

     The World Wide Web is growing at exponential rates, and it is important to have some basic knowledge of the twists and turns of the Internet before exploring either of these sights. High school students and novice browsers would be best off if they chose the Washington Post site since it is more basic and easier to navigate while still providing sufficient information. College students and more advanced browsers with audio-visual capacities would enjoy the Time/CNN site due to the variety and complexity that is offered. Both sites have many of the same benefits, but at varying levels. Either way, a browser is certain to gain some knowledge and insight into the scandal that became the Watergate crisis and ended the Nixon Administration, especially if they are interested in the current situation and obstruction of justice charges aimed at the Clinton Administration today.