50 years after the Watergate break-in, in what ways does it compare to the Jan. 6 riots?

Watergate — the political scandal involving the June 1972 burglary and illegal wiretapping of the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate Hotel in Washington D.C. — drove President Richard Nixon to resign two years later to avoid impeachment. Details surrounding the break-in and the revelation that it was carried out by members of the president’s reelection campaign – as were the subsequent cover-up and other abuses of power by the White House — came to light through the investigative reporting of Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. The facts of their Pulitzer Prize-winning journalism informed a Senate Committee investigation, prompting the only resignation of a U.S. president in the nation’s history.

David Goldfield, UNC Charlotte’s Robert Lee Bailey Professor of History, observes similarities and differences between these political events now 50 years in the past and their related congressional hearings and those currently taking place in regard to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

How are the Watergate hearings similar to — and different from — what we know to date about the Jan. 6 riot and hearings?

Goldfield: The timeline for the January 6, 2021, Capitol riots is still unfolding, so any comparison with Watergate must take that into account. But a few similarities and differences are evident. The primary connection is the investigation into the role of two presidents in these events. Also similar is a lack of overall agreement in 1973 about wrongdoing on the part of President Richard Nixon and his administration, comparable to what we see today in regard to President Donald Trump and his administration’s connection to January 6. Significantly different, however, is the bipartisan condemnation that grew during the Watergate investigation for the actions of the Nixon White House as evidence mounted. That said, not all favored impeachment by the end of July 1974, more than a year after the Watergate hearings began.

How did the media landscape 50 years ago influence public opinion compared to that of today?

Goldfield: It’s important to remember that in the 1970s there existed — in addition to print media and radio — only three major commercial broadcast networks. Starting in May 1973, PBS carried the proceedings in full, with the three television news networks taking turns to do so. To everyone’s surprise, the proceedings riveted the nation, not only capturing attention but eventually shifting public opinion against the president. With the testimony of White House Counsel John Dean, who had begun cooperating with the Senate panel as early as April 1973, it was apparent that what occurred was more than “dirty tricks.” The related cover-up represented an assault on democracy that ultimately led to Nixon’s resignation, an event supported by many from the president’s own party, who initially had been skeptical even after the Washington Post published revelations about the events and Nixon’s participation. It was Dean’s testimony that confirmed the reporting of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein concerning the involvement of the president.

Today, with cable news and social media options integrated among traditional news formats, consumers of news gather information much differently than in the past and often confirm their opinions through outlets that align with their outlook. By summer 1974, the American people eventually understood and mostly agreed that the buck stopped with the president. It remains to be seen as the January 6 hearings continue how steadfast opinions remain as new facts are learned.

How might the number and kinds of news stories competing for our attention play into the opinions we form and the conclusions we draw?

Goldfield: Context is important. During the crucial spring and summer of the Watergate hearings, the last of the U.S. troops left Vietnam, thereby significantly reducing the war’s news coverage. Also, although the Arab oil embargo would roil the American economy in fall 1973, that was not yet on the horizon. The economy, despite some inflationary indications, seemed to be performing well. There was no major health crisis, such as the COVID-19 pandemic today, and no foreign factors threatening to disrupt the nation’s economy as is the war between Russia and Ukraine. There remained racial and generational conflicts left over from the 1960s, but these issues seemed to be subsiding, particularly with the end of the Vietnam War.

In the absence of other major news to dilute the public’s attention, Watergate – and Nixon’s culpability – were the focus. By late July 1974 with the release of damning White House tapes that proved the president’s complicity in the break-in cover-up, a majority of Americans began to turn against him. After that revelation, 57% of Americans favored impeachment. By comparison, a Newsweek poll of June 16, 2022, indicated 54% of respondents were supportive of the Department of Justice indicting former President Donald Trump over the Capitol riot.

What are the important takeaways from each of these incidents to keep in mind about the strength of U.S. democracy?

Goldfield: It’s important to note that each of these incidents is a different type of assault on the U.S. Constitution and the democratic process of government enshrined in that document. The Watergate hearings underscored that the U.S. system of government was robust and protected the American people from a president’s autocratic tendencies. A sitting president had attempted to secure information about an opposition leader and his party to gain advantage in an upcoming presidential election. The real damage to democracy, however, was the cover-up: the design of the Nixon administration to deny involvement in the crime. While we are still awaiting the final outcome of the January 6 hearings, the proceedings are investigating a president’s possible role in an attempt to threaten the roots of American constitutional democracy, specifically, the peaceful transfer of power after an election. Comparisons with Watergate, while valuable in providing a context for the current crisis, should not obscure the fact that the two events are not merely differences in degree, but, rather, differences in kind. The threat to our democratic institutions and, particularly, on the democratic process going forward remain.

David Goldfield, the Robert Lee Bailey Professor of History at UNC Charlotte, is the author of 16 books, two that were nominated for a Pulitzer Prize in History and won the Mayflower Award for nonfiction: Black, White, and Southern: Race Relations and Southern Culture and Cotton Fields and Skyscrapers. In a book he recently co-authored, The American Journey (Pearson: 8th Edition, 2018), the Watergate scandal is among the topics addressed. He serves as an academic specialist for the U.S. State Department as well as a lecturer for the Organization of American Historians and as an expert witness in voting rights and capital punishment cases.