Woodward's lost legacy

Maggie says:

Amidst the hyperventilating coverage of Bob Woodward’s new book State of Denial – a “detailed and inside story of a war-torn White House” – lies progressive emptiness in the wake of this "indictment" of the president. While I recognize that progress is made every time someone decides that this war and this administration are just plain wrong, the backstory here is so stomach-turning I can’t even feign delight.

Bob Woodward’s legacy, of course, comes as one-half of the Nixon-busting duo at the heart of the Watergate scandal. But Robert Redford portrayal or not, let’s make no mistake about what State of Denial is and isn’t. It’s not a one-man exposé of the seedy conspiracies and dirty corruption behind the push for war in Iraq. It’s not a tome produced in the name of effecting positive change. It is an example of the establishment shifting its opinion on the Bush administration and the “war on terror.” And while an establishment symbol making that shift does have value, this is no time for a victory lap.

After all, too much has been lost to get to this point. And that loss is exactly the problem with State of Denial: that in the years Woodward watched and waited in the West Wing, he published two best-sellers proclaiming the righteousness of Bush’s war, stood by as hundreds of thousands civilians and soldiers were killed overseas, watched a presidential election go by him, and only now, after much of mainstream media has decided Bush is down for the count, is ready to announce the bombshell news that this administration is dishonest with the American people.

To quote Arianna Huffington: “Welcome to 2002, Mr. Woodward.”

The truth is, Woodward lost his muckraker status long ago. His recent odes to machismo – Plan of Attack and Bush at War – solidified his sell-out, insider status. Now more known for his limp passivity on cable TV than for groundbreaking journalism or insight of any kind, Woodward is a product, but not a heart and a brain. Unless Woodward denounces his last two books – and then donates all the proceeds to peace-making organizations – his credibility is worthless.

Reeking of ego, the audacity of Woodward’s book is his assumption that there are no conclusions until he announces them. The thing is, we’ve all moved on with our conclusions; they came long ago. In a time when we can’t trust that newspapers will really tell us “all the news that’s fit to print,” we’ve gone outside of the mainstream for information, analysis, and perspective. We have to. Yet Woodward still believes he’s someone worth listening to. The name that will sell millions, yet say nothing at all…

Woodward’s betrayal isn’t just to American soldiers, to Iraqi civilians, and to voters who honestly believed Bush in his call for war. Woodward is actively betraying his own legacy, one of the richest that modern history has to offer. "Woodward and Bernstein" were about unrelenting demand for the truth, for government accountability, for the power of information, and for the right of everyday people to know and to decide for themselves. All of that is further lost with "exposés" like this one.

By forging a modern identity as a man who craves access more than truth, high-profile status more than credibility, and obliqueness more than assertion, the biggest "State of Denial" at work is actually Woodward’s own.

Technorati tag: bob woodward, state of denial