The Insider, 1999

Feb. 19, 2022 | RUBY RIVERA

The Insider is a movie based on a true story about a big lawsuit against the tobacco industry. The story follows CBS producer Lowell Bergman, who is in charge of interviewing those involved in the lawsuit for a segment called 60 Minutes. Bergman eventually approaches Jeffrey Wigand, who was formerly an executive for a tobacco company, in order to gain further clarification on certain documents. However, despite Wigand’s initial agreement, he refuses to give much information as a result of a confidentiality agreement. The company that he initially worked for persuades him to gain an even tighter agreement, and Wigand accuses Bergman of betraying him as a result. Despite knowing information that could be very damaging to the case and the company, Wigand refuses to reveal anything as he does not want to put his severance package with his old company in trouble. This connects to a desire for good will, as Wigand does not want to jeopardize the company and does not mean any harm to either the company or Bergman. However, he is still abiding by the rules and agreements set in place, and refuses to move from them in order to defend his intention.

To get to the bottom of everything, Bergman contacts an attorney in Mississippi, Richard Scruggs. He plots to somehow thwart Wigand’s agreement with his company in order to make way for CBS to cover the story in full. Bergman’s plot to do so reminds me of the concept of “duty” in Kantian ethics. Throughout the movie, he consistently expresses that it is his duty as a part of his job to get down to the gritty details and go digging where he should not be in order to tell the full story. Even with Wigand, the same can be applied to his dedication to his old company, and how he believes it is his duty to keep every detail confidential for the sake of what he believes is right. They both individually follow their own moral code.

Later on, Wigand receives a death threat and a bullet in his mailbox, and despite contacting the FBI about it, they take his belongings. From the beginning of the movie and all throughout, Wigand faces troubles with his family, home, and societal pressures. Ethically, this adds even more trouble for him, as the pressure from both his family and society make knowing what the right thing to do is much harder for him. Finally, Wigand gives in to the pressures around him, and arranges an interview with Bergman. He reveals that the reason he was fired from the company was because he was against the company trying to make their products much more addictive. This leads Wigand to testify in Mississippi, and afterwards he finds that his wife has left him as a result of the situation, and has taken their children with her. His wife leaving him further challenges his pure intentions behind keeping the information confidential, and it is also a consequence of attempting to keep quiet. Regardless of his well-meaning intention and action of refusing to say anything, the consequence was that the pressures of the situation would cause strain within his own personal life, and eventually lead his own family to leave him. Although Bergman was finally able to get the interview out of Wigand, CBS refused to air it due to corporate pressures, and the possibility of them being sued by the tobacco company. He tried to argue that the interview would be enough to save CBS from being sold to another company, but his point was not enough. When Wigand learns of this, he decides to entirely cut contact with Bergman.

From here, outside sources investigate Wigand, and The Wall Street Journal threatens to use what they have found to tarnish Wigand’s credibility. Bergman finds a way to delay this from being published, and regardless of all the fighting at CBS over the story, they air an altered version of the 60 Minutes segment, that does not include the interview both men had. There is further pressure added with Scruggs telling Bergman to air the initial unaltered episode anyway, despite the impending threat of being sued by the governor. Helpless, he questions his motives. Here, Bergman is finally beginning to wonder whether or not pursuing a story as risky and difficult as this is truly part of his duty. He questions his own moral values, especially after seeing the full impact of what pursuing this story has had on not only Wigand and CBS, but himself. His initial intention for chasing this story has changed from the beginning of the movie. In the very beginning, it was solely due to the juicy story, the good representation it would give CBS, and his dedication to the company. Now, it is a matter of what he believes is personally right, and wrong.

Finally, Bergman tells the entire story to an editor that works for the New York Times, and CBS is then completely exposed to the public for how they have handled the story and events that have occurred throughout the film. Hewitt, the executive producer at CBS, disagrees strongly with Bergman’s decision to expose them, but Wallace finally understands that not airing the initial segment was a mistake. The interview in full is now finally released, and the movie ends with Bergman quitting his job for CBS.

Additional Resources