I was gonna say, Watergate

Must be a former Gannett editor who was laid off and took a WaPo night deputy associate assistant Web consulting position.



Don Segretti: "I heard the newspaper business is failing. How did you get money to fly out here to California?"

 

@deepthroatdc: folo the $$$

 

@bobwoodward RT@deepthroatdc are we being followed? oh noes

@carlbernstein nom nom nom

 

I was saying Booo-urns

 

spot on, sixtoe ... nicely done

 

You know, not to curtail all the gallows humor that followed this post, but I actually do remember hearing something to this effect from a well-connected college professor over the course of a series of lectures that took place in one of the best classes I've ever taken.

Don't remember the story as told by the professor, exactly, but it was something about how the Post and the NY Times were both, especially in the early stages, on the trail of Watergate, and how that made the Post reporters' work on the story all the more so urgent and so great.

If the Times' handling of things really was as slow, careless and purposely ignorant as it sounds, then this was an example of a paper just dropping a story for a while because it knew it had been beaten, badly, on it.

That happens in competition, sometimes. We've all seen it, and it sounds like that could have been the case here.

 

I agree, WT.

I believe from reading ATPM there is a passage in which they mention knowing the NYT is on the trail as well. I think you're right about the NYT dropping the ball, shrugging a bit and saying they would get around to it eventually.

Until the final stages when WoodStein connected the White House to it, the public and a lot of the media generally ignored it. That point was made in the movie as well. No one gave a shit because Ron Ziegler and Agnew were relentless about denying and attacking the WaPo, plus the oil crisis was heating up.



WaPo Web Editor: "One of our reporters was sleeping with a White House assistant? She wasn't? Who cares! Bradlee knows? Someone get to the podcast studio fast!"

 

<b>Bob Woodward:</b> Bob just topped Carl Bernstein's best score in Pathwords. Can you beat theirs?

 

Holy hell did the second line make me giggle. We have a lolstein.

 

Outstanding.

I've seen or been directly involved with three of four from point-blank range. All but the first, which I'm sure will be coming soon. I'd have to vote for #4 as most sickening of all.

 

I really wonder what would happen if Watergate happened today.
The story might be over in a week.
Monday: Speculation - who was behind the break-in?
Tuesday: Condemnation - "if the White House is behind this, someone must be held accountable."
Wednesday: Titillation - Meet the stunning secretary who may know secret behind the break-in.
Thursday: Exploitation: Vivid offers secretary $1 million for porn film.
Friday: Capitalization: Secretary denounces offer. WH launches "war on porn."

 

all these posts have been terrific. 8) 8)

as previously mentioned, i believe woodstrein and the ny times were the only papers chasing watergate and connecting the dots. much more to it than whatever may have been spilled over a lunch between a times reporter and source.

but letting the convo slip through their fingers in such classic fashion is an all-time classic. but seriously, it's not as if the times reporter left for law school and fell off the face of the earth. it kind of smells funny to me that the guy never spoke to his ol' buds at the times about the tapes he left behind.

i mean, it took a loooong time for woodstein to put together the entire story. they were racing the times almost the whole way weren't they. their paranoia over the times was well-documented.

so we're to believe the ex-reporter kept this all to himself for 37 years? wtf?