ShareThis Page
Bradlee’s mixed legacy |
Featured Commentary

Bradlee’s mixed legacy

Ben Bradlee, the legendary Washington Post editor who died recently, has been widely praised for his work building up The Washington Post and bringing down Richard Nixon.

But the many extravagant tributes to Bradlee have paid less attention to his relationship with an earlier president, John F. Kennedy. It’s not that their friendship was a secret; indeed, Bradlee wrote a book about it. It’s just an embarrassment. And when it came time to evaluate Bradlee’s life, the sycophancy of his association with JFK did not fit the image, carefully tended by colleagues and friends, of the journalist as a courageous puncturer of inflated reputations.

Bradlee’s book, “Conversations With Kennedy,” told the story of his, and his wife Tony’s, friendship with John and Jacqueline Kennedy from its beginning in 1958 until the JFK assassination in 1963.

For much of the book, Bradlee seemed impossibly star-struck. He described flying with the Kennedys to Hyannis Port in 1959, arriving well after midnight. JFK headed to the refrigerator and hauled out a huge container of clam chowder. “We watched in fascination as he gulped down four large bowls, one after the other,” Bradlee wrote. “In anyone else it would have been gluttonous.”

On the night of the 1960 West Virginia primary, the Bradlees went to a movie with the Kennedys, then took a bottle of champagne to JFK’s Georgetown home for a private celebration. (Bradlee was covering the race for Newsweek.) When word came of Kennedy’s victory, “modest war whoops were let fly,” the champagne was popped, and Kennedy asked if the Bradlees would like to join him on his private plane to West Virginia. “Would we ever!” Bradlee wrote.

Bradlee didn’t tiptoe up to the line of journalistic propriety in his relationship with Kennedy; he stomped all over it. Not content to write glowing accounts of Kennedy’s campaign, Bradlee also gave JFK private intel on the opposition.

In May 1959, after covering a speech by Democrat rival Lyndon Johnson, Bradlee wrote a confidential strategy memo to Kennedy assessing Johnson’s performance and offering advice on convention plans.

That episode isn’t in “Conversations With Kennedy.” It is, rather, in a 2012 biography of Bradlee by Jeff Himmelman, who noted that Bradlee “never mention(ed) having written this memo in any of his books or interviews.” Himmelman found it at the Kennedy Library.

Bradlee stayed close to Kennedy as the new president took office. There were fun dinners, frequent phone calls, trips to the country. White House dances were “dazzling,” Bradlee wrote.

As a journalist, Bradlee’s friendship with Kennedy brought him prestige and the envy of competitors, but nothing really worth compromising his integrity.

“Kennedy never gave Ben big scoops, particularly during the (1960) campaign” wrote Himmelman, “but he handed out tidbits.”

Bradlee’s admirers revere him as a man not afraid to stand up to power. But that depended on who was in power; his is a mixed legacy.

After Bradlee’s death, a number of remembrances noted the many journalists who wanted more than anything to be like Ben. “Conversations with Kennedy” is an extended lesson on why they shouldn’t.

Byron York is chief political correspondent for The Washington Examiner.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.