Journalistic Criticism of Richard Nixon's Watergate Speaking of 1973. Millard Fayne Eiland Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1974 Journalistic Criticism of Richard Nixon's Watergate Speaking of 1973. Millard Fayne Eiland Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Eiland, Millard Fayne, "Journalistic Criticism of Richard Nixon's Watergate Speaking of 1973." (1974). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 2722. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/2722 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. 5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Rood Ann Arbor, Mfchigan 48106 EILAND, Hillard Fayne, 1933- JOURNALISTIC CRITICISM OF RICHARD NIXON'S WATERGATE SPEAKING OF 1973. The Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College,Ph.D., 1974 Speech Xerox University Microfilms,Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED. JOURNALISTIC CRITICISM OF RICHARD NIXON'S WATERGATE SPEAKING OF 1973 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of Speech by Millard Fayne Eiland B.A., Baylor University, 1955 B.D., Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1959 Th.M., Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1961 M.A., University of Houston, 1968 December, 1974 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................... iv ABSTRACT..................................................................... v Chapter I. INTRODUCTION............................................................................ 1 Preview of this Chapter Purposes of the Study Scope of the Study Materials Used Contributory Studies Rationale Methodology The Nature of the M aterials Conclusion and Preview II. BACKGROUND AND SETTING.......................................... 34 Watergate: A Brief Description of the Events The Larger H istorical Context A Watergate Chronology III. IMPRESSIONISTIC CRITICISM .......................................... 62 Introduction Characteristics and Examples Implications IV. ANALYTIC CRITICISM ........................................................ 91 Introduction Characteristics and Examples Implications li V. SYNTHETIC CRITICISM 111 Introduction Characteristics and Examples Implications VI. JUDICIAL CRITICISM .............................................................. 156 Introduction Characteristics and Examples Implications VII. CONCLUSIONS......................................................................... 210 General Characteristics of the Responses Evaluation Implications BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................ 259 VITA.................................................................. 316 Hi / ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author wishes to thank the following persons who assisted in this project: my wife, Anne Eiland, for editing and typing; my mother, Lilliam Eiland; and Bette Keating for typing; and Jay Williams for proof-reading. Several institutions and libraries were helpful in pro viding facilities and materials for the study; they are: The Uni versity of Houston, Rice University, Texas A. & M. University, The University of Texas at Austin, North Texas State University, Prairie View A. & M. University, and the Houston Public Library. The author especially would like to express appreciation for the guidance, encouragement, and inspiration several teachers provided through the years of study which culminated in this doc toral project: Dr. Chloe Armstrong and Dr. Paul Baker at Baylor Uni versity, Dr. Charles McGlon and Dr. Eric Rust at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Dr. William Linsley and Dr. Wayne Thompson at the University of Houston, Dr. Owen Peterson, Dr. Burl Noggle, and Dr. Waldo Braden of the Louisiana State University. Each of these teachers made significant contributions to my thinking and to my academic development—contributions for which I am grateful. iv ABSTRACT During the early days of Watergate, Richard Nixon responded to the crisis in public speechmaking which received wide spread attention. American journalists reacted to those speech events, exposing Americans to an unusual number of critical assessments. The reactions to the first four 1973 Watergate speeches (on April 30, August 15 and 20, and the August 22 news conference) formed the bases for this study: an analysis and evaluation of 691 responses in America's print media in the "top ten" and six other newspapers and in twelve magazines. Criticisms appeared in editions also printing the speech texts; they appeared before and after the speeches. Responses were so numerous and prominent that they became almost parts of the messages themselves—a kind of mosaic of summaries, expectations, and reactions. Responses were uneven in quality and appeared in media not noted for their perceptiveness of oral communication as a distinct form of communication. Respondents revealed no particular under standing of rhetorical criticism tradition, and epitomized the types or levels described in Speech Criticism, by Thonssen, Baird, and Braden: impressionistic, analytic, synthetic, and judicial. These were both a justification for interest in the writings and a means of discussing them. The categories provided chapter headings for the dis cussion and pointed up the varying emphases and degrees of sophis tication, the types and levels of criticism. Within each chapter the responses also were discussed in terms of the classical canons of rhetoric to determine the emphases and bases of criticism in each c a s e . The writer found that the critiques resulted in a "group effort" effect as each writer contributed to a composite picture of evaluation to which readers were exposed. Also, some reporters wrote brief remarks at one point, while later writing more developed resp o n ses. Most of the criticisms were relatively fair and accurate. No deliberate distortions or misquotations were found, although nearly two-thirds were unfavorable to Nixon's rhetoric. Some over simplified or wrote in the peculiarly disorganized journalistic fashion, while some were brilliant assessments. All focused attention on the speeches and the issues. Most focused on ideas and arguments and used references to style, organization, and delivery to support assertions about Nixon's ideas and arguments. Poll reports and other articles tended to be fragmentary and truncated, while columns and editorials did vi most of the genuine evaluation. Considering the limitations of the medium and the jour nalists' purposes, the reactions to Nixon's rhetoric provided the public with a composite picture of what the President said and suf ficient bases for their own assessments. The responses employed a critical method even though they were not fully developed criticisms. They were most successful in focusing attention on the rhetorical events and in helping readers to conceive of these events as rhe torical acts in a matrix of complicated circumstances and feelings— acts which are subject to evaluation. In spite of publishing deadlines, editorial policy limitations, and variations in allegiances and intelligence levels among the readers, reporters did a commendable