New Nixon Documentary Highlights How Easily the White House Can Mislead the Press

“The press is the enemy. The press is the enemy. The press is the enemy.”

380450 26: President Richard Nixon in the Oval office February 19, 1970 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by National Archive/Newsmakers)
National Journal
Sarah Mimms
Aug. 4, 2014, 10:04 a.m.

In late 1971, the me­dia por­trayed Richard Nix­on as a com­batant in the war for wo­men’s equal­ity, push­ing force­fully to ap­point the first wo­man to the Su­preme Court of the United States. But in real­ity, as his secret re­cord­ings re­veal, Nix­on nev­er in­ten­ded to seat a wo­man on the bench at all. As he would time and again dur­ing his pres­id­ency, Nix­on used the me­dia to pro­mote a false nar­rat­ive about him­self. And the press was nev­er the wiser.

The epis­ode is one of many dis­sec­ted in dir­ect­or Peter Kun­hardt’s new HBO doc­u­ment­ary, Nix­on by Nix­on: In His Own Words, re­leased this week just ahead 40th an­niversary of Nix­on’s resig­na­tion. Us­ing only the secret tapes re­cor­ded by the pres­id­ent and me­dia ac­counts from the time, the doc­u­ment­ary of­fers a unique and per­son­al per­spect­ive on one of the most stud­ied pres­id­en­cies in U.S. his­tory, un­di­luted by mod­ern ana­lys­is.

{{ BIZOBJ (video: 5147) }}

What emerges is a por­trait of a deeply para­noid pres­id­ent, con­vinced that his “en­emies” — most fre­quently, the press — were out to get him. And of course, even­tu­ally, they did.

Where­as most doc­u­ment­ar­ies fol­low­ing the Nix­on pres­id­ency fo­cus on the Wa­ter­gate scan­dal and the press’s in­volve­ment in his ul­ti­mate down­fall, Bob Wood­ward and Carl Bern­stein are men­tioned just once in “Nix­on by Nix­on.” In­stead, the film un­cov­ers the troub­ling ways in which the Nix­on White House would ma­nip­u­late re­port­ers and just how much the press got wrong. The doc­u­ment­ary raises ques­tions about just how much the me­dia can truly know, much less re­port, about any ad­min­is­tra­tion.

Take, for ex­ample, Nix­on’s nom­in­a­tions to the Su­preme Court. In Septem­ber, 1971, two Su­preme Court justices an­nounced their resig­na­tions, giv­ing Nix­on an op­por­tun­ity to shift the Court’s ideo­lo­gic­al lineup. His staff floated a list of pos­sib­il­it­ies to the press, in­clud­ing two wo­men, either of whom would be­come the first fe­male to serve on the Su­preme Court.

The Nix­on ad­min­is­tra­tion signaled pub­licly that the pres­id­ent would name Mil­dred Lil­lie, then a judge for the Second Dis­trict Court of Ap­peals, to one of the seats. But listen­ing to Nix­on’s secret tapes on the mat­ter, it be­comes clear that both wo­men were in­cluded merely to gain fa­vor with the press and fe­male voters ahead of the 1972 elec­tion.

But the me­dia ob­ses­sion over Lil­lie and her po­ten­tially his­tor­ic ap­point­ment be­came too much for Nix­on. In a re­cor­ded phone call, Nix­on asks At­tor­ney Gen­er­al John Mitchell to float some oth­er names to the press, telling Mitchell: “I would like to sorta get off the wo­man kick if we can.” He even men­tions the pos­sib­il­ity of adding some Jew­ish names to the list, des­pite fre­quently us­ing a four-let­ter slur in ref­er­ence to them in his private phone calls and telling staff, in a sep­ar­ate con­ver­sa­tion: “Most Jews are dis­loy­al. You can’t trust the bas­tards.”

In the end, the Amer­ic­an Bar As­so­ci­ation ruled Lil­lie un­qual­i­fied for the po­s­i­tion and me­dia re­ports por­trayed Nix­on as hav­ing suffered a minor de­feat.

But the re­cord­ings make it clear: Nix­on had no in­ten­tion of ap­point­ing a wo­man to the Court. He re­peatedly char­ac­ter­ized wo­men as too “emo­tion­al” for such a po­s­i­tion and spoke re­peatedly with Mitchell in the days lead­ing up to the ABA’s de­cision to in­sure that the as­so­ci­ation would find Lille not qual­i­fied for the job. “He’s aware of the fact that we’re go­ing to have to put it on them?” Nix­on asked Mitchell, re­fer­ring to then-ABA pres­id­ent Lawrence E. Walsh. ” “¦ Let them take the rap for the wo­men.”

Two days later, Nix­on nom­in­ated two white men: Lewis F. Pow­ell Jr. and Wil­li­am Rehnquist. In me­dia foot­age, Nix­on makes the an­nounce­ment as if with a heavy heart, prom­ising that one day soon a wo­man will serve on the Su­preme Court. The crowd ap­plauds.

This is the dis­turb­ing theme of Nix­on by Nix­on: that the pres­id­ent who told Henry Kis­sing­er, “The press is the en­emy. The press is the en­emy. The press is the en­emy,” was so of­ten able to sub­vert the me­dia es­tab­lish­ment. It wasn’t just Lil­lie. Me­dia clip after me­dia clip from the era is fol­lowed im­me­di­ately by a secret re­cord­ing of the Nix­on White House dir­ectly con­tra­dict­ing it, on everything from his con­nec­tions to the Wa­ter­gate scan­dal to the war in Vi­et­nam.

Of more con­cern, the me­dia tac­tics that Nix­on em­ployed in his White House have be­come stand­ard prac­tice for ad­min­is­tra­tions since, as Me­dill journ­al­ism pro­fess­or Jon Mar­shall writes for The At­lantic:

Nix­on and his staff ul­ti­mately bungled their ef­forts to si­lence journ­al­ists, and he paid the price with his resig­na­tion. In con­trast Obama, Bush, Re­agan and oth­er suc­cessors have used Nixoni­an tac­tics more skill­fully, and with less crim­in­al in­tent, to con­trol the me­dia as they present a slick­er im­age to the pub­lic than Nix­on could ever man­age. The res­ult is a na­tion that knows less than it should about what its gov­ern­ment is really do­ing.

Nix­on by Nix­on: In His Own Words premi­eres on HBO to­night at 9 p.m.

What We're Following See More »
THE 1%
Sanders’s Appeals to Minorities Still Filtered Through Wall Street Talk
57 minutes ago
WHY WE CARE

It’s all about the 1% and Wall Street versus everyone else for Bernie Sanders—even when he’s talking about race relations. Like Hillary Clinton, he needs to appeal to African-American and Hispanic voters in coming states, but he insists on doing so through his lens of class warfare. When he got a question from the moderators about the plight of black America, he noted that during the great recession, African Americans “lost half their wealth,” and “instead of tax breaks for billionaires,” a Sanders presidency would deliver jobs for kids. On the very next question, he downplayed the role of race in inequality, saying, “It’s a racial issue, but it’s also a general economic issue.”

DIRECT APPEAL TO MINORITIES, WOMEN
Clinton Already Pivoting Her Messaging
1 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

It’s been said in just about every news story since New Hampshire: the primaries are headed to states where Hillary Clinton will do well among minority voters. Leaving nothing to chance, she underscored that point in her opening statement in the Milwaukee debate tonight, saying more needs to be done to help “African Americans who face discrimination in the job market” and immigrant families. She also made an explicit reference to “equal pay for women’s work.” Those boxes she’s checking are no coincidence: if she wins women, blacks and Hispanics, she wins the nomination.

THE QUESTION
How Many Jobs Would Be Lost Under Bernie Sanders’s Single-Payer System?
9 hours ago
THE ANSWER

More than 11 million, according to Manhattan Institute fellow Yevgeniy Feyman, writing in RealClearPolicy.

Source:
WEEKEND DATA DUMP
State to Release 550 More Clinton Emails on Saturday
9 hours ago
THE LATEST

Under pressure from a judge, the State Department will release about 550 of Hillary Clinton’s emails—“roughly 14 percent of the 3,700 remaining Clinton emails—on Saturday, in the middle of the Presidents Day holiday weekend.” All of the emails were supposed to have been released last month. Related: State subpoenaed the Clinton Foundation last year, which brings the total number of current Clinton investigations to four, says the Daily Caller.

Source:
LATER TO THIS YEAR’S NADER
Jim Webb Rules Out Independent Bid
9 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

UPDATED: Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) will not be playing the role of Ralph Nader in this year’s election. Speaking in Dallas today, Webb said, “We looked at the possibility of an independent candidacy. Theoretically, it could be done, but it is enormously costly and time sensitive, and I don’t see the fundraising trajectory where we could make a realistic run.”

Source:
×