The Pentagon Papers: The Commencement of the Age of Government Leaks The 1960s were undoubtedly one of the greatest decades of change in American history. They encompassed the Civil Rights Movement, Women’s Equality marches, the Cold War, the Vietnam War, along with countless other substantial moments in history. The Vietnam War and the publication of the “Pentagon Papers”, major political events of the time, consumed and defined this period because of their immense impacts on society. With technology on the rise and the world becoming increasingly globalized, the Pentagon Papers created new and modern struggles for the government and society. This marked a major turning point in American history. It redefined the relationship of the media and the government. The event changed the way the American people view their government and created multiple societal cleavages; freedom of the press versus the security of the nation, and differing opinions about the government withholding information from the people. Overall, the Pentagon Papers revealed a reason to distrust the government by the American people that has continued on into modern decades. I intend to explore the historical significance of the event, rhetorically analyze two primary sources, and further explore the implications on today’s society. The Pentagon Papers marked a major turning point in American society regarding the government’s relationship with the media and the people that still impacts life today. History The Vietnam War commenced in November 1955 under the orders of President Eisenhower. The original intentions of the war included securing the containment of communism and the USSR. However, this bloody war continued for 20 years and became arguably the most controversial war in United States history. The United States intervened, in support of the South Vietnamese, fighting the North Vietnamese Viet Cong, communist fighters on the side of the Vietnamese government. Initially, American support for the war was high. The Cold War had instilled fear into Americans, and therefore a strong sense of nationalism was present in the country, and the American people rallied around their leader, President Eisenhower. However, as the war carried on, public support dwindled. The first signs of antiwar movements began on college campuses and became national in the mid-1960s. It became evident to the American public the end of the war was not in sight. In 1967, Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense of the Johnson administration, ordered a top-secret comprehensive study of US involvement in Vietnam from 1945-1967 to be conducted by the Department of Defense (DoD). This study would later come to be known as the “Pentagon Papers”. When McNamara had ordered the study, he had already concluded the war was unwinnable, and American defeat was inevitable. Although McNamara’s intentions were not clear, it is thought this report, in his mind, would help President Johnson’s advisors come to the same conclusion regarding the War. Further, he thought the study could trace America’s misuse of policies in the region in the past and how that could justify a new shift in policy and would be a sufficient documentation of history for future generations. The report was completed in 1969 and was 47 volumes in its entirety, over 7,000 pages. Daniel Ellsberg, a former US Marine, was an analyst working on the study for the DoD. Like most, Ellsberg was an initial supporter of the war. However, as time passed, he became more pessimistic. While working on the Pentagon Papers report, he became a staunch opposer of the war. At this point, Ellsberg felt so strongly against the war he was self-compelled to take action. In 1969 he began copying the documents and leaked them to the New York Times. In June 1971, the front page story was published; it revealed the author’s plan to release information from their findings day-by-day. The release “revealed that the presidential administrations of Harry S. Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson had all misled the public about the degree of U.S. involvement in Vietnam” (History.com). The release of the documents confirmed the public suspicion of the government and dramatically raised disapproval ratings. On the third day of publications, the Department of Justice filed for a restraining order on the New York Times, leading to a federal lawsuit. By June 30, the Supreme Court had reached a decision, by a 6-3 vote, with the Court siding with the Times, stating the government “had failed to prove harm to national security, and that publication of the papers was justified under the First Amendment’s protection of freedom of the press” (History.com). This marked the first time in national history the US government had forbade a newspaper to print, therefore violating the paper’s free speech granted by the US Constitution (Belknap). Shortly after, the Times and other papers continued the publication of the documents. In 1975, the Ford and Nixon administrations ended the war in Vietnam. American troops were withdrawn and subsequently, the North won the war. It was not until 2011 that the government fully released the Pentagon Papers. The Pentagon Papers marked a major turning point in American society regarding the government’s relationship with the media and the people that still impacts life today. Rhetorical Case Study In the 1960s, citizens gathered information through newspapers, radio, and television. Government leaks were almost unheard of, and citizen trust in the government was relatively high. According to a Pew Research study, in 1964 77% of Americans reported they could trust the government to do the right thing most of the time. Within a decade, the number had dropped to 36% (Fingerhut). This dramatic drop in trust can be attributed to the Pentagon Papers scandal and its aftermath. A major shift in public attitude and the relationship between the government and the people occurred as a result of this incident, beginning with the New York Times article that first revealed the existence of the documents and an interview with the man behind the papers, Daniel Ellsberg. June 13, 1971 New York Times Publication June 13, 1971, the New York Times published one of the most controversial issues of all time, forever changing the media and the government. On this day the Times published its first installment of the Vietnam Archives, the series that released government information about the “Vietnam Archive”, later called the “Pentagon Papers.” This publication presented complex problems for American society and the relationship between the government and the people. The release of classified information about the war involved different groups of Americans, and everyone had a stake in the issue. The first major stakeholder was the American people, including the media, the everyday public, and American soldiers in Vietnam. Their opposition was the government, including the Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon administrations. The two groups had opposing viewpoints on the issue and on the ramifications of the release. First, American citizens living in a democracy expect freedom of the press and transparency from the government. The leaks revealed this was just an ideal and was far from reality. Anger and frustration was widespread among the public. Many Americans already opposed the war, and this gave them more ammunition to back their beliefs. Second, the government’s position on the issue was of staunch opposition to the American people. Their viewpoint can be characterized with embarrassment and fraction actions to cover their mistakes. The war was still in full force, and this leak undermined government authority and legitimacy, something the Nixon administration desperately needed moving forward. Further, according to the federal government, the leaks put national security into question. One of the most notable feats of the leaks was the shifting of power from the government to the people. It was evident the source was credible. Neil Sheehan, the author, detailed what the papers were, where and how he received them, and the time he took analyzing them. Further, as an investigative journalist, Sheehan spent years detailing the Vietnam War to the American public. The author’s ethos was established and relevant from the get-go. The article was broad and worded in simple language; however, it outlined the shared important and factual information. Sheehan incited the masses by revealing the government’s mishaps, stating “... [the papers] reveal a great deal about the ways in which several administrations conducted their business on a fateful course…” (Sheehan). The credibility and fierce claims of the article strengthened the already active grassroots movement of anti-Vietnam protests. At this point in time, the newspapers and the ordinary public held the power. Further, Sheehan exposed the relentless nature of the government in regards to expanding the war despite the fact it proved to be unwinnable. These claims incited extreme emotion and infuriated citizens. People were dying for what seemed like no reason, spurring citizen action to defend those who were not able to speak for themselves. Sheehan effectively utilized pathos by revealing the truth about the amount of casualties and the reasons for them, both two things that were misreported by the federal government. Further, his decision to publish the information called his readers to action to question the government and its blatant lies pertaining to the war. His call to action was not outrightly stated, for his main goal was to educate the audience, however, it proved to be effective. The government, mostly consisting of the elite and powerful, suffered a great loss of ethos from the leak. Not only did it show how susceptible they can be to leaks, it also proved their dishonesty and inability to win the war. Sheehan, concise and effective in relaying the important bits on information, states the Johnson Administration intensified secret warfare in the region a full year before it was known by the public, in full awareness the war was basically unwinnable (Sheehan). This is just one of many examples that detail the dishonesty of the federal government. Further, when the leaks occurred, President Nixon was unaware of the leak or the fact that the documents existed (Altschuler). This exposed the government's lack of preparedness and damaged citizen trust in government. The leak of the Pentagon Papers revealed a weakness in the US government and forever damaged their credibility and relationship with the American people. CBS Evening News - June 23, 1971 - Walter Cronkite Interviews Daniel Ellsberg Ten days after the first leak, Walter Cronkite, the CBS Evening News host, interviewed Daniel Ellsberg in regards to the Pentagon Papers. They met in an undisclosed location and Cronkite agreed to not discuss Ellsberg’s alleged role in the leaks. The interview was the first time the public heard from Ellsberg and he was able to reveal his true intentions behind the leaks. Ellsberg is evidently biased when commenting on this moment in time. His government background and immense investment in the war, along with his classifed knowledge, further his anti-war point of view. Because of his personal bias, his credibility with the audience is questioned. Yet, his knowledge is all credible and factual; it is only his feelings towards the issue that have potential bias. However, what he lacks in ethos he makes up for in pathos, or his emotional appeal to the issue and the American public. During the interview, Ellsberg stated he thought the biggest lesson was “‘the people of this country can’t afford to let the President run the country by himself, even foreign affairs, any more than domestic affairs, without the help of Congress, without the help of the public…’” (Linder). Through this quote, Ellsberg’s true intentions became clear. He did not want to harm the government; he just wanted to help the people by informing them and attempting to protect the democracy in which they live. Throughout the interview, Ellsberg defends his decisions and thus conveys his stance on the immensely controversial issue. Further, his viewpoints are persuasive and effective in conveying a compelling message. This interview was Ellsberg’s chance to defend his actions, what some were calling treasonous. It becomes clear that his actions were rational and logical in his mind. Ellsberg acknowledges the impact of the papers and the cleavage it created between the citizens and the government. However, he further asserts that the citizens have a right to know ‘“that that the men to whom they gave so much respect and trust, as well as power, regarded them as contemptuously as they regarded our Vietnamese allies’” (Linder). Evidently, he wanted to expose the imperfections in government by educating citizens to think and act on their own. Further, he intended to make the leaders of our nation accountable for their actions and wrongdoings. Ellsberg, a major stakeholder in the issue, effectively utilized his opportunity to win over the American public. The already unpopular war became drastically more unpopular, citizens were pitted against their government, and a large cleavage between the media and the government widened. Ellsberg was able to win over the American public with his logical and factual evidence along with his personal and emotional involvement in the war. Although a biased source, Ellsberg acted on behalf of the American citizens in order to reveal the dishonesty of the government, forever changing the way Americans think of their government. Today’s Impacts The First Amendment of the US Constitution grants the freedom of speech and press to all American citizens. Many political scientists argue these freedoms are the basis of democracy, and a free and rigorous press is a necessity. When national security and government leaks come into play, the situation complicates itself. The Pentagon Papers “prompted the first attempt ever made by the Federal Government to impose a prior restraint on the press in the name of national security” (Apple). Although the courts sided with the press and ultimately upheld the Constitution, the leaks changed the relationship of the government to the media and the people from that day forward. Leaks, similar to the Pentagon Papers, are occurring more frequently in today’s society, but do not always garner the same amount of attention. The Pentagon Papers indisputably changed the government and media relationship. One of the largest cleavages still evident today is the public’s right to know, especially when the leaks can potentially harm national security. In 2006, Wikileaks, an online publication specifically created to publicize secret government documents, was created (Altschuler). From 2010, the proliferation of leaks became evident, and the total suppression of leaks became nearly impossible. Many people, including Ellsberg himself, have commented on the similarity of the Pentagon Papers and Wikileaks (Altschuler). However, “Mr. Ellsberg’s goal was to change a particular government policy. He did not breach secrecy for the sake of breaching secrecy” (Haberman). Julian Assange, the Australian founder of Wikileaks, is accused of releasing information for the sake of breaching secrecy and to further impede US citizens distrust in the government. The Wikileaks platform has complicated government leaks and has the potential to harm national security. Further, the expansion of government leaks has changed the media-government relationship. Recently, President Trump “declared the news media nothing less than the enemy of the people” (Haberman). Government leaks have no doubt increased the tension and distrust in this complex relationship. Additionally, the Supreme Court case in regards to the Vietnam-era leaks established a precedent for future leaks that still holds up today (Belknap). To this day, the courts have been reluctant to issue restraint on the media because of the precedent set in 1971. It is impossible to deny the effects the Pentagon Papers had on today’s society. Although there are many complex effects on society, there are also two significant lack of effects in regards to the 1971 leak. The first, the leaks have not changed the way the government conducts its business. Our government has “...continued to conceal… The Iran-contra affair, almost certainly illegal, was conceived and carried out by the Reagan Administration in total secrecy…” (Apple). American citizens are still deprived of information on a daily basis and only uncover the truth about the events much later on. In some instances, national security is at stake, and the public must be kept in the dark. However, many times the citizens are kept in the dark to conceal government wrongdoing. Further, many of the leaks our government has fought fiercely against to stop actually have no impact on national security. Many leaks, such as the Pentagon Papers, provoked “sharp denunciations when published, yet ultimately, they seem, aside from embarrassment, to have done little damage to national security. Even Secretary of Defense Robert Gates concluded late in 2010, ‘Is it awkward? Yes. Consequences for U.S. foreign policy? I think fairly modest’” (Altschuler). It is becoming more evident most leaks, such as the leaks about Hillary Clinton prior to the 2016 election, are not threatening national security, but exposing the lies of our government. The ramifications of the Pentagon Papers are still apparent today through widespread distrust in the government and increasing leaks of classified information. Conclusion The Pentagon Papers marked a significant time in the US government’s internal affairs and its relationship with the citizens. The leaks, the first of their kind, educated and mobilized citizens in displays of protest against their government and the highly controversial Vietnam War. The government and the media were pitted against each other and faced the controversial question: when does the citizen’s right to know end when discussing matters of national security? The ramifications of the incident, including the freedom of press, security versus freedom, and the media’s relations with the government, are still heavily felt and questioned in today’s society. The incident ushered in a new age of government leaks and strained relations of the government and its citizens that have continued into present day.