| 'Katharine Graham's Washington'
With Ben Bradlee
Vice President at Large, former executive editor,
The Washington Post
Monday, Dec. 2, 2002; Noon ET Katharine Graham's legacy stretched far in Washington, D.C. -- not only because she was the publisher and later the president and chairman of The Washington Post Company, but because she was a citizen of the city. She moved among the celebrated and earned her place at the table in business and journalism. And along the way, as detailed in her Pulitzer Prize-winning autobiography, "A Personal History" (Knopf, 1998), she collected stories, friends and history. Those are now detailed in a new book: "Katharine Graham's Washington" (Knopf, 2002). Ben Bradlee served as executive editor of The Washington Post for 23 years, through the Pentagon Papers and Watergate, and became vice president at large in 1991. He was online Monday, Dec. 2 to talk about Katharine Graham's legacy, her view of Washington, and how they transformed the newspaper. The transcript follows. Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
washingtonpost.com: Good afternoon, Ben, and thanks for joining us. What was the inspiration for the book "Katharine Graham's Washington," and how did you come to be involved with it? Ben Bradlee: To tell the truth, she was looking for something to do, and she started off writing a book about her mother's diaries. Then she dumped that, then she hit on the idea of a collection of other people's writing about the city, which she loved. And my connection was almost zero; she took a piece that I'd written about Jack Kennedy. And she still wants to be on the best-seller lists, which she is, and I wanted to help.
Baltimore, Md.: What were Mrs. Graham's two or three most valuable, tough-to-replace personal and/or professional traits? Ben Bradlee: Once she made up her mind, she was incredibly supportive, and that's a wonderful characteristic. She had the guts of a burglar, not scared of anybody, and she had a terrific time in her life.
Lexington Park, Md.: As Katharine Graham's personal pick for the job of editor, she put you in charge of making or breaking her reputation as owner of The Post. You had no really top experience as an editor before taking on the job. Did you share the confidence Mrs. Graham had in you and knew what you wanted to do and were chomping at the bit to get started or were you overwhelmed at the task? Ben Bradlee: Now, from looking back, I really didn't know what the hell I was doing. I didn't know anything about daily newspapers; I'd worked for one in my life for two years. I didn't know where the press room was; I didn't know how the newspaper was produced. I guess Katharine felt I was good at picking people. As the bureau chief of Newsweek, I knew all the good young reporters in Washington. My M.O. was to ask myself if The Post had the best correspondents in the city on any particular job. And we didn't.
Austin, Tex.: As you are aware there is a story in the book "Friends in High Places: The Rise and Fall of Clark Clifford," where a story on integration of D.C. swimming pools was killed if The Post would surrender the story to the back of the paper? Did Mrs. Graham ever intercept stories and ask you to kill or not publish a story involving recent American presidents and their White House occupants, as an exception to publishing for political purposes, and could you describe the circumstances where such a story was killed or removed to the back pages because of a personal objection on her part? Ben Bradlee: Katharine Graham never, never, never spiked a story. Once she asked me to make sure some story was covered, and I forgot. And she greeted me the next morning with a smiling "Thanks a lot." The Clifford story came in the very early '50s, when there were riots at the public swimming pool in East Potomac Park. I was covering those riots with another Post reporter. We came back after almost 36 hours on the riot scene and found a story buried in the Metro section, which referred to "an incident" and nothing else. And I was screaming in the City Room when I felt a hand on my elbow, and it was Phil Graham. And he said, "Come upstairs with me, buster." This was about 9 o'clock at night. And he took me up to his office, and there was Clark Clifford, Julius Krug, who was the secretary of the interior, and his deputy, Oscar Chapman -- all in tuxedos. And he asked me to tell them everything that I'd done that day, none of which was in the paper. When I was through, he dismissed me and told the big shots that my story would be in the paper if they didn't agree that night to close all the municipal pools and open them to unsegregated the next year. I thought it was a deal with the devil at that time. But that's how the pools in Washington were desegregated.
Pittsburgh, Pa.: By all accounts, Katharine Graham showed great moral courage consistently throughout her professional life. In your opinion, what was the foundation of this courage? What early influences gave her such an unwavering approach? Ben Bradlee: She had very strong individual parents, even though they weren't the warmest people who ever lived. She had a wonderful education at the University of Chicago. She had friends who were really dedicated to trying to change the world. And she had the guts to ask for help.
New York, N.Y.: Mr. Bradlee: One of the unsolved questions of recent history is whether John Kennedy actually intended to make Lyndon Johnson his running mate at the 1960 Democratic Convention, or only to extend a pro forma offer he expected Johnson to decline. Moment-by-moment accounts conflict in some respects, but they seem to agree that there was an awkward moment AFTER the offer of the vice presidential nomination when Bobby Kennedy was in Johnson's hotel suite suggesting that Sen. Johnson become national chairman of the party instead -- and being dismissed by Sam Rayburn with an expletive. Of course, Phil Graham had been an intimate confidant of Johnson's and a friend of Kennedy's who served as a communication conduit between them. Based on all that she knew -- presumably including what her husband had told her about his direct conversations with the two principals -- Mrs. Graham reports in "Personal History" that she believes the nominating of Johnson was, in effect, accidental -- that John Kennedy had not really intended to run with the Texan. I have four related questions: (1) Do you agree? (2) Do you know what she based this conclusion on? (3) Do you think Phil Graham overstated his influence on the pairing of the two in the convention memoir that appeared in Teddy White's 1964 book? And (4) Do journalists have any business carrying messages between political candidates at such a time? Thank you.
-- Tim Kelley Ben Bradlee: I think Kennedy had no idea that Johnson would accept, and was really stunned when he did. Of course, Bobby tried to talk Jack into withdrawing the invitation. The real impetus, according to most people at the time, came from Phil Graham himself, along with Joe Alsop. In the '60s, a lot of journalists who were friends of politicians gave them advice, and loved that part of their job. Many suggested that presidents hire so-and-so. My feeling is that that was not our role, ever. If you suggested someone for a job and that person was chosen, you really surrendered your right to criticize or even to report on it. Phil Graham believed the exact opposite, and he was enormously influential for a time. In the case of Roger Ailes, he was really outlining a program for the president, and I think he looked foolish in the process. The thing that makes all this germane is the Freedom of Information Act, which means that eventually all of these letters to presidents become public. For instance, I wrote Jack Kennedy two letters in my life. One was an answer to a note from him asking me who I would like to speak to when I was planning to write a book on the first 100 days of the Kennedy administration. The second came after a night in which we discussed ethics in politics and government, and he asked me to jot down some ideas for a speech he delivered a couple of weeks later at Yale on ethics in government. Both of them surfaced 20 or 30 years later, and they were sort of creepy, I think, now.
Crofton, Md.: Her legacy will be that she was the owner and manager of The Post, a great newspaper. Even though I don't particularly like the changes that Don Graham, her son, has made. That is putting local news -- traffic jams, etc., on the front page. Do you think that Ms. Graham would have approved of the change and would she have approved of putting so much sports coverage on the front page? Ben Bradlee: Katharine Graham was no jock. But she was an intensely loyal person, and when she decided that she would transfer power at The Post to her son, she backed him all the way. There are so many ways to edit a newspaper that no two people would do it the same way. And that includes differences between owners and editors -- not big differences, but differences.
Washington, D.C.: Mr. Bradlee, Can you talk a bit about both the advantages and the vulnerabilities of a family-owned newspaper? Is being owned by a family other than a large corporation harder or easier when the economy tanks? What are the advantages when it comes to news coverage and business and editorial decision making? Ben Bradlee: I think it's obvious that the best newspapers -- certainly in America -- are those newspapers which have been controlled by a single family. The Post and the New York Times, for sure -- the Los Angeles Times when it was controlled by Otis Chandler, the Boston Globe when it was owned by the Taylor family, and many smaller newspapers. I think the reason is that these people were guided by their principles and not their pocketbooks. In other words, if business was bad, they could live with a lot less income from the paper. That's much harder to do now that these newspapers are all publicly owned, listed on the stock exchange. Sometimes the decisions are so simple. If for some reason, a newspaper owner wants to save $150,000, just like that, he or she can take one reporter out of the Moscow bureau. And that $150,000 goes right to the bottom line. A more principled owner might say that if the editor thinks the story requires two reporters in the bureau, the progressive owner will not save $150,000 that way.
Washington, D.C.: We're in an extremely difficult time for journalists, between the war on terror and the impending war in Iraq. Journalists are being shut out of the process of information, and they're being attacked. What do you think -- and what do you think Mrs. Graham would think -- about the way things are being handled in terms of the press, the government and the military? What should the press be doing differently? Ben Bradlee: All governments try to control the press, especially in war time, when they can wave the banner of national security and scare the poor readers. Actually, today on the battlefield, censorship is harder than ever before, because of technology. Today, a reporter can file from anywhere, including a battlefield where the enemy is in sight. Using a telephone that weighs only 5 or 10 pounds, these reporters can dial up the newsroom of The Washington Post from darkest Afghanistan, and then press a button, which will send the story he has just dictated to the computer on an individual editor's desk. The censorship by people in the Pentagon or people in the Justice Department or the White House is something else again. If leaders of those institutions can prevent reporters from talking to news sources, the public is going to suffer.
Alexandria, Va.: Ben, my father wrote for the Post for over 20 years. Is it still the Post -- can it still be the Post -- with Mrs. Graham gone? Ben Bradlee: The Post isn't the same today as it was when your old man wrote for it. It isn't the same today as it was when I was editor. Newspapers are living objects. They change with events, they change with newsmakers, they change with reporters and editors. That's the way it should be.
Boulder, Colo.: Are we entering another Watergate era, with Henry Kissinger heading an important commission? If so, will this time be worse than Watergate, since the Republicans control both houses of Congress and the Presidency? Ben Bradlee: I believe in the glass that is half full. I think Kissinger will have a very hard time if his purpose is solely to make the Bush administration look good, and cover up the failings of the FBI or the CIA. The great thing about the truth these days is that it emerges. Cover up or no cover up, sooner or later, the truth will out. Sometimes it seems to take forever. But in my experience, the truth will eventually emerge, and Kissinger's place in history will suffer if he takes part in any conspiracy to cover up the truth. I don't think he wants to do that.
Washington, D.C.: If Mrs. Graham never spiked a story, what was her most important role at the newspaper? People make an issue of Murdoch and Rev. Moon as story-spikers because they have no news background, but The Post is now into its third generation of family ownership. If a Graham can't spike a story, what makes The Post different from USA Today or The Washington Times (Style section not included, Mr. Bradlee). Ben Bradlee: In the first place, Murdoch has been a newspaperman all his life. I think the most important role of an owner is to form a set of principles and choose people who will put those principles into the paper every day. What makes The Post different from the Moonie paper is that Mrs. Graham's first principle is to publish the truth, regardless of whether it clashes with her private opinions.
Washington, D.C.: What was Mrs. Graham's (and what is your) primary perception of the city? In the book and elsewhere it has been described as a Southern provincial town, as a political capital dominated by the Georgetown bohemia, as a still largely segregated city? Ben Bradlee: When Katharine Graham came to Washington, it was a Southern provincial town -- probably not all that sleepy, but it was segregated, it was beautiful, and it was filled with strong people trying to wreak their will. For Katharine's first years in Washington, she was less of an observer, then a student, then a bride, then a mother and a hostess. I think it was only after Phil died that she became fascinated with Washington as a place where all this government theory, government talk, was actually practiced. She really did love this city, and spent enormously of herself -- money and time -- to understand it and to make it better. The good that she did with her charitable contributions has never received the public knowledge and approval that it should. And the same is true of the Graham family today. They don't like publicity, as strange as that may seem in this day of hunger for publicity.
Mandeville, La.: Whom do you believe Mrs. Graham most admired among the presidents she knew and why? Ben Bradlee: Mrs. Graham was more involved, probably, as a young woman, with members of the last two Roosevelt administrations -- so many of their friends worked in that administration. After that, she identified with the Kennedy administration, especially Kennedy as the first president born in the 20th century. She knew and admired Schlesinger, Lyndon Johnson, Kissinger. Maybe she was closer to Lyndon Johnson and to Lady Bird than anyone else.
Hartford Conn.: Mr. Bradlee, Once in a while I read that the Bush administration is one of the most secretive ever; do you think that's so? Are they the types to have socialized with Mrs. Graham? If they are secretive, why would Bob Woodward be invited into the inner circle, or were they trying to spin him? Ben Bradlee: Of course the Bush folks were trying to spin Woodward. Every administration he's ever written about has tried to spin him. It's really quite amazing to see those pictures of Woodward sitting in his leather chair at the ranch, while Bush tries to answer page after page of questions that Bob gave him. I rather admire the president for working as hard as he did to spin Woodward, and subjecting himself to some three hours -- and all of it on the record. The first thing I saw in that picture of the two of them was Woodward's tape recorder, and then I started looking for the president's tape recorder, but couldn't spot it. I don't think the Bush people socialize very much with reporters -- as far as I can find out. But they keep the animals fed, that's for sure.
Gene Weingarten, Washington, D.C.: By the way, who is Deep Throat? Ben Bradlee: As for you, Weingarten, get a life. If you exercise every day, and get off the sauce, you will learn Deep Throat's identity, when we want you to know.
washingtonpost.com: That wraps up today's show. Thanks to everyone who joined the discussion.
© Copyright 2002 The Washington Post Company | 
