I was a pre-schooler when the Watergate scandal broke in 1972. My most vivid memory was my frustration that PBS was broadcasting the Senate Watergate hearings gavel to gavel, preempting Sesame Street.

Incredibly, it’s been 50 years since the “White House plumbers” were arrested June 17, 1972, at Watergate’s Democratic National Committee offices.

I also (sort-of) recall Aug. 9, 1974, the day Richard Nixon, facing impeachment and almost certain removal from office, resigned his presidency.

That situation was unlike the more recent impeachments of Donald Trump and Bill Clinton who each avoided convictions and hung on to the Oval Office, piling on to America’s existing division.

I remember Nixon’s resignation speech only because my mother made me and my brother watch. She kept saying, “This will be history.”

She wasn’t wrong.

Since then, I’ve come to know a bit about that history, including the remarkable investigative reporting that ensured arrests and political scandal weren’t covered up.

I guess those Watergate hearings could be viewed as the nation’s first earnest attempt at around-the-clock news reporting. It enveloped our nation.

I’m not sure if national news coverage in those days was more balanced than it is today, but I suspect at least the public’s perception was more trusting.

That might be because back then the TV news report was just that — a 30- or 60-minute report about the day’s events without endless hours of biased commentary, debate and even criticism on how competing stations report the news.

Nowadays, what many viewers don’t realize is only about five or 10 minutes of each hour of the 24-hour cable news cycle is actual reporting. The remaining 50 to 55 minutes is filled with opinion and commentators advising what viewers should think and why.

Still, I believe news reporting today — real investigative reporting, not commentary — is every bit as good as it was back then.

When I decided to study journalism, the incredible work of the Washington Post’s super duo of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein was inspirational. The pair’s ability to earn trust of sources who shared so much secret, even classified, information rank them among the most respected, celebrated journalists ever.

News tips to Woodward and Bernstein from “Deep Throat,” the secret informant later identified as associate FBI director Mark Felt, led to several stories about the investigation and its links to Nixon.

Decades later, Woodward and Bernstein kept the source’s trust by maintaining his anonymity until Felt himself finally confirmed his identity.

A new Washington Post piece by Manuel Roig-Franzia released last week outlines how Woodward, in spring 1974, was contacted by Martha Mitchell, estranged wife of Nixon’s corrupt former Attorney General John Mitchell, with an invitation to look through her husband’s Manhattan home office.

“Have at it, boys,” she told Woodward and Bernstein after they arrived at the Fifth Avenue apartment.

Here, in my much smaller newsroom, we also get frequent tips. But believe me when I say we NEVER got a tip like that one.

My longtime very good friend and former co-worker Lisa Abraham once received an anonymous tip from a caller identifying herself only as “deep neck.” We laughed hysterically at the mistaken pseudonym, presuming she meant to call herself “deep throat.”

We still laugh out loud about that. Neither Lisa nor I can remember what the news tip was — but we’ve never forgotten the undercover name!

The point worth noting here is that the anonymous caller knew the significance of “deep throat” and faith in the press stemming from coverage of stories like Watergate.

And, unlike now, the public was unified as those government hearings unfolded.

I see much irony in the fact that on this 50th anniversary of that dark day in American history, congressional hearings, once again, are being televised, this time of a House committee investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on our Capitol.

Americans’ support of the current investigation is anything but united.

Instead, interest remains very divided on what has been uncovered, whether a conspiracy existed and if a sitting U.S. president was involved.

That surprises me. No matter what political leanings we have, isn’t this something Americans should want to know now just as much as we wanted the truth in 1972?

blinert@tribtoday.com