Journalism Code of Ethics

The SPJ Code of Ethics and All The President's Men

 The movie All the President’s Men shows elements that refer to the code of ethics of journalism and acording with the JSP code of ethics, to Minimize Harm, Be Accountable, and Keep promises.

1. An episode during the movie illustrated confusion in the newsroom about The Post’s sourcing policies. In the incident, described in All the President’s Men, Bradlee was questioning Woodward about a source for a story about Watergate figure E. Howard Hunt’s political activities on behalf of the White House:

Research on unnamed sources has focused on three general themes: how unnamed sources affect story credibility, how often unnamed sources are used and how journalists view unnamed sources. Some studies have found no difference between named and unnamed sources in how people perceive news credibility. However, many journalists and scholars believe unnamed sources harm credibility and do not serve the public interest. “Secrecy raises questions about the motives of both reporter and source,” wrote media ethicist Fred Brown. “It hurts the credibility and accountability of  media outlets.” Moreover, the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics calls for identification of sources whenever possible.

The controversial Washington institution of the background briefing became the focus of “periodic efforts” by Bradlee “to bar Post reporters from any sessions where government officials speak under a cloak of anonymity.” Bradlee believed that The Post must insist on public accountability for the public’s business.  As he put it, “We believe that responsibility cannot be transferred by us to any public official or circumscribed by government edict.” He argued thatthe public interest is not served by policy statements of faceless officials.  But Bradlee’s efforts to put an end to background briefings ultimately failed because of the intense media competition in Washington. Information disclosed on background by anonymous officials produced too much important news, thus making Bradlee’s initiatives unlikely to succeed.

Media magnates, in short, were concerned that the press's prominent role in Watergate would damage the legitimacy and credibility of their industry. They wanted to reassure the public and the government that the press, though free of government controls, would act responsibly. "Editors said, 'Let's watch out for reporters who try to act like Woodward and Bernstein,'" former Post editor Ben Bradlee recalls.

2. 

At another point in time, Bernstein and Woodward damage their own credibility by incorrectly reporting that Hugh Sloan had identified H. R.Haldeman before the grand jury as one of five men who handled the secret fund which financed many activities by the Presidents men. Distraught, the two reporters began getting tough with their sources. They had to nail Haldeman another way. It was the first time either had blown a source, and they were unhappy about it. ("Both knew instinctively that they were wrong. But they justified it. They suspected they had been set up; their anger was reasonable, their self-preservation was at stake, they told each other.") However, they do admit that in exposing their source. 

In this clip from the Documentary "All The Presidents Men Revisited", Hugh Sloan is being interviewed. They show clips from the movie where Sloan secretly confirmed that Haldeman had a hold of the money. However, the two reporters published that he had testified in front of the Grand Jury when he never did.

The next clip from the documentary shows how the media, the white house,and other news outlets used the slip up to negatively frame The Washington Post, Woodward, and Bernstein. 

The next two clips from the documentary and the Film show the reporters feelings about the mistake and how the film portrayed it accurately. 

The film doesn't show the White House pouncing on the reporters like they did in real life, but uses their remorse for the mistake to frame them positively. 

SPJ Code of Ethics
Preamble:
Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist's credibility. Members of the Society share a dedication to ethical behavior and adopt this code to declare the Society's principles and standards of practice. 

The SPJ Code of Ethics is voluntarily embraced by thousands of journalists, regardless of place or platform, and is widely used in newsrooms and classrooms as a guide for ethical behavior. The code is intended not as a set of "rules" but as a resource for ethical decision-making. It is not — nor can it be under the First Amendment — legally enforceable.

Journalists Should:

Minimize Harm, act independently, and be accountable.

The SPJ Code of Ethics is voluntarily embraced by thousands of writers, editors and other news professionals. The present version of the code was adopted by the 1996 SPJ National Convention, after months of study and debate among the Society's members.