Noted investigative reporter Carl Bernstein spoke about journalistic and governmental accountability as a part of the Assembly Series on Thursday afternoon.

Bernstein delivered the annual Elliot Stein Lecture in Ethics, sponsored by the Center for the Study of Ethics & Human Values, and was joined by two state senators for a discussion panel after his speech.

Bernstein and his colleague Bob Woodward were responsible for the Washington Post’s investigation of the Watergate scandal that resulted in the resignation of President Nixon in 1974.

“We saw in Watergate democratic principles succeed in a way that affirmed our common belief in the idea of government that serves its citizens—affirmed the rule of law,” Bernstein said.

Bernstein believes that post-Watergate society has seen a failure of the people to hold the government accountable for its misdoings, and he admonished society for its interest in “soft news.”

“It’s not the job of the press to topple government. It’s the job of the press to report real existing conditions in the culture of society and government, not to bring about the results a reporter wants,” Bernstein said. “It’s the job of the people, the job of the legislature they elect to topple the government, the job of the institutions and systems of government.”

“It’s not just about politicians in Washington, and it’s not just the press, because the people have been complicit in this compact too.”

In the panel discussion after his talk, Missouri state senators Republican Scott Rupp and Democrat Jeff Smith responded to Bernstein’s comments and continued a discussion with him about campaign finance and the upcoming election.

Smith received his Ph.D. at Washington University and regularly teaches a class on campaigns and elections in the Department of Political Science.

The senators agreed with most of the reporter’s cultural cynicism.

“When you are a candidate for election, the truth becomes irrelevant because no one is actually out seeking the truth,” Rupp said. “It can be said, ‘Why repeat the truth when maybe you can create it?’”

The panel discussion included a question-and-answer session with the audience.

The event was open to the public and had a large and varied audience in attendance. The crowd response was generally positive with occasional bursts of applause.

“I loved it. I love [Bernstein’s] work, and I’m a big fan of Jeff Smith,” local high school student Genevieve Buthod said. “They said many things that anyone can agree with, and were very non-hostile about it. It was a huge honor to meet them.”

But a few dissenting students stayed after the event to talk to Bernstein and the senators and express their disagreement.

“I thought Bernstein in some sense embodied the problems he was discussing,” senior Dan Alexander said. “When he talked about gerrymandering, he pointed to them and yelled and dragged them in the mud by association. However, I thought both senators made great attempts to be high minded.”

Bernstein and both senators expressed their desire for this election to lead to a decrease of what they referred to as “cultural warfare”—the abuse of wedge issues and personal attacks in campaigns.

“There’s been a message in this campaign from the people in this country, the constituency of both candidates. Fix this system, we know its broke, and we’ve not had leadership at the state level or national level that has shown any inclination to fix it,” Bernstein said during his lecture.

Alexander, however, believed Bernstein made many accusations without suggesting enough answers.

“I walked in here knowing the system was broken, and I don’t think he offered any solutions,” Alexander said. “He just made us more afraid for an hour.”