Week 12. Investigative Journalism

I must admit, I was happy that this week’s lecture changed to Investigative Journalism. As exciting as Political Economy sounded, I think it was pretty worthwhile learning stuff that will be useful to people in the class next semester. Maybe not me directly, but for others I’m sure it will help. J

It does sound like a bit of a double up when you say ‘Investigative Journalism’. At its very core is journalism not meant to be investigation? But, I do understand how it is just the term for a single type of, perhaps, further investigative journalism work. Going above and beyond the straight daily news!  Once again we were introduced with some thought-provoking quotes by the Red Man himself (my new name for Dr Redman). My favourite of the first three was the one by Hugo de Burgh:

 "An investigative journalist is a man or woman whose profession it is to discover the truth and to identify lapses from it in whatever media may be available.”

This is spoken so directly and clearly that even me, a relatively new face to the journalism scene, can feel a confident grasp on what is meant by the term investigative. Simply, you must seek the truth and you must work hard to get it.

Funnily enough you can define and break down INvestigative journalism into 5 IN words. As you can see below!

• Intelligent
• Informed
• Intuitive
• Inside
• Invest

I’ll discuss and analyse each of these individually as well.

1. Intelligent – Some topics that might be considered for an investigative piece will most likely revolve around either money, sex or power. You can’t just be writing willy-nilly about this stuff! Every investigative journalist must consider carefully and INTELLIGENTLY everything they write.
2. Informed – Before beginning an investigative journalistic piece you would want to ensure you were as well-read on the topic as possible. If you plan on covering a topic at great depth, not doing the early base work could actually be of great detriment to you later down the track as you could miss the whole point or ‘main story’ of your investigation.
3. Intuitive – This will likely come with experience. Intuition about story angles, story ideas and even situations you find yourself in because of your job as a journalist will be honed through years of practice in the field.
4. Inside – This refers to the idea that, in order to get a good/worthwhile story you must be given access to the truth and to the necessary information. The person you are interviewing must have complete trust in you and this can only be built through rapport and your historical reputation as a journalist.
5. Invest – Investigative journalism is heavy business. You must realise the impact of accepting a task that may take years to complete, cost lots of money, consume a crazy amount of resources and could affect your relationships.

Another aspect of Investigative Journalism that was discussed in today’s lecture was its deeper meaning and purpose in society. These can be described by the following:

• Critical and Thorough Journalism: This is all about ‘active intervention’. The journalist has to actually be an active participant in the story and contribute substantial effort. I would imagine that being involved in such a project would consume a massive chunk of your life. It is a lot to sacrifice.

• Custodians of Conscience: Think ‘exposure’. It allows public scrutiny of morals and norms that would never normally be questioned. Once a really critical piece breaks, it can and most likely, will, change the world

• Provides a voice for those without and holds the powerful to account: In the ‘public interest’. Without investigative journalism so many social justice stories would still be kept under wraps. An example of this being “Syria Exposed”. An investigative piece that discloses the mistreatment of Syrian people.

• Fourth Estate/Fourth Branch of Govt/Watchdog: Represents the interest of those without power to balance the authority that the government has, makes public figures accountable and hopefully exposes corruption wherever it is involved in a public organisation

An example that always springs to my mind for some reason is the Four Corners investigation on ADFA. I can’t actually imbed the video here, but it can be viewed from this link. I can’t imagine the defence force would be too pleased about being investigated in this manner, but that is where the beauty lies in in the investigative journalism process.

An extra note that was given to us by the Red Man was to have the attitude of scepticism but not cynicism. I thought that this was actually an extremely interesting point to raise. A quick comparison of the definition of the two shows:

Sceptic – a person who questions opinions generally accepted.

Cynic – a morose, surly, or sarcastic person.

Wow, I didn’t actually think that would clear it up so well for me. I understood for the most part the difference between the two. But when you compare those definitions to the possible mindsets (cynical or sceptical) you could have when beginning a journalistic venture, it is clear how being sceptical is actually so important to the task of investigative journalism.

Later in the lecture, Red Man told us that if “your mum says she loves you, check it out.” I checked that out! It’s true J. Haha. In addition to that he told us that the point of that statement is that when it comes to investigative journalism you have to check EVERY fact, you assume NOTHING aaand maybe expect your whistleblowers to be a little crazy.  I’d say the first two are definite important ones to keep in mind. Imagine the hit a journalist’s reputation would take if it’s discovered they have used the wrong information for even a small part of their story? The whole report would be undermined.

As usual the lecture was ended with the potential threats to the topic, this week clearly being Investigative Journalism. Many of these seemed familiar because I believe we discussed similar topics earlier in the semester. Once again, online news seems to be an evil force to the future of quality journalism. People want their news quick, and news companies have the facilities to provide that. The resource they don’t have, however, is the cash to pay for lengthy investigations that could actually get them in some legal hot water at the end of their investment. It is difficult to see commercial news companies fully sinking their teeth into investigative journalism in the future as they are all about the economic profits and the amount of eyes they have on their screen.  

The other threat is Public Relations. With PR statements coming out so regularly, it is the quick, cheap and easy way for news companies to fill up their content. None of this investment of time, investment of money or investment of journalists is necessary when words are delivered to you. Herein comes the dreaded churnalism. No substance, no fact checking, no investigation.

But check this out. Hopefully it raises your hopes like it did mine for the continuation of investigative journalism. 

x.

PS. Are you as sick of the word investigative as I am right now?