Knight v. Eagleton

The assignment given Clark Hoyt of the Knight Newspapers' Washington bureau was strictly routine: research the background of Senator Thomas Eagleton and produce a profile for the eleven-paper Knight chain on the newly named Democratic nominee for Vice President. But Hoyt, 29, wound up last week uncovering the biggest political story in years. Only after McGovern confronted Eagleton with Hoyt's information did Eagleton detail his full medical history of psychiatric treatment. TIME, as Eagleton noted, was also on to the story and was working to develop it. The admission set off an uproar, and obscured the fact that Knight was done out of a scoop while performing in the best tradition of responsible journalism.

Newsmen in the Midwest and Washington had been aware for years of rumors that Eagleton had experienced fits of depression and drinking, but proof had always been lacking. While Hoyt was en route to St. Louis, Eagleton's hometown, the phone rang in the office of John S. Knight III, editorial writer for the Detroit Free Press and grandson of the chain's editorial chairman. The caller seemed "very nervous," and said that he was a McGovern supporter. But he knew that Eagleton had been treated for mental disorders, and thought the fact should be publicized early so as not to embarrass McGovern later. The information was vague, but the caller mentioned a St. Louis psychiatric hospital.

Detailed Memo. The gist of the call was relayed to Hoyt, who found the hospital adamant in refusing to discuss the matter--but the refusal was couched in terms indicating the information was true. Hoyt also heard of other Eagleton hospitalizations for "gastrointestinal" problems and "sudden weight loss." He thought the evidence strong enough to warrant a detailed memo to Robert Boyd, Knight's Washington bureau chief. The two arranged to meet at Rapid City, S. Dak., and discuss whether to approach McGovern's staff.

Hoyt and Boyd, though sitting on a major exclusive story, decided to turn over a two-page summary of Hoyt's memo to Frank Mankiewicz, McGovern's campaign director. Mankiewicz took the summary to McGovern. In return, Boyd and Hoyt expected some corroboration of their story and a chance to interview Eagleton before breaking it. But the McGovern camp decided to present Eagleton as voluntarily admitting past mental disorders rather than responding to an accusation. Aides rushed him into a public admission at a press conference that robbed the Knight papers of an exclusive they had earned through Hoyt's hard digging.

In the uproar that followed Eagleton's disclosure, Columnist Jack Anderson raised additional charges. "We have now located photostats of half a dozen arrests for drunken and reckless driving," he declared on a Mutual Network radio broadcast. Eagleton promptly called the charge "a damnable lie." When newsmen asked to see the documentation, Anderson started backing down; he had "traced but not seen photostats of Eagleton's traffic records." Finally the columnist produced a "reliable source" who said he had been given "nine, ten or eleven" photostats of traffic citations from a man claiming to be a Missouri state trooper. The source turned out to be W. True Davis, 52, a Washington, D.C., banker, former ambassador to Switzerland and ex-Under Secretary of the Treasury. Davis is a wealthy Democratic wheelhorse from St. Joseph, Mo., who ran against Eagleton in a three-way 1968 Democratic primary race for the Senate seat of Missouri's Edward V. Long. Where were the photostats? Davis said he "tore all that stuff up." Could they have involved someone other than Eagleton? "I doubt it." Could they have been falsified? "There's always that possibility."

Anderson said he had tried to reach Eagleton for 24 hours without success before making the charge on the radio, and had withheld it from his widely read column because he could not "authenticate the traffic citations personally." He conceded that "I wouldn't normally and I shouldn't have" used the information before getting documentation, but insisted that "I knew there were a dozen reporters going after this. That's why I used it on the radio, to cover myself." Anderson promised a full apology to Eagleton if the charge proved unfounded. Altogether it was a poor piece of journalism by a Pulitzer prizewinner who should have known better.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.