INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING

INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING
he question WHAT IS INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING is still a cause of debate even among journalists-practitioners, as well as media theoreticians.

One side is convinced that INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING is the peak of the reporting skill, and consider the investigative reporters special kinds of journalists.

Others consider INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING to be simply a trendy title, just another way of marking the old, good, thorough journalism, which was unfathomable without constant running after the news, and without "peeling off the soles of their shoes" all day long.

One of the most important skills of a good reporter is the ability to simply, convincingly, and clearly explain what he/she wants to say. A good way to do so is by comparing with generally known information or everyday situations. If we would use this method to demonstrate what investigative reporting is, we could use, for example, police work as a comparison.

Investigative reporters, as forensic criminologists, determine what has happened according to the existing «evidence», and very often predict what is going to happen. However, they are not clairvoyants. Their powers are not supernatural, but they come from the fact that they know how to use special skills and methods. Just like forensic criminologists, they know how to "read the evidence".

What is investigative reporting?

What are particularities of investigative reporting? How to differentiate investigative reporting from "standard" reporting, and can that difference be clearly defined? What is the role of an investigative reporter? Who is an investigative editor? How was investigative reporting created and how did it develop? What is the role of investigative reporting today? This text makes no pretence to answer to all of these questions, but only to give the basic information on investigative reporting that might inspire you to learn something more.

1. INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING - A NECESSITY OR A MYTH?
The question WHAT IS INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING is still a cause of debate even among journalists-practitians, as well as media theoreticians.

One side is convinced that INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING is the peak of the reporting skill, and consider the investigative reporters special kinds of journalists.

Others consider INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING to be simply a trendy title, just another way of marking the old, good, thorough journalism, which was unfathomable without constant running after the news, and without "peeling off the soles of their shoes" all day long.

Therefore, is there such a thing as investigative reporting?

If there is, how does it differ from the "standard" form of reporting?

Simply good reporting, or more than that?

Investigative reporting definitely exists both as a hypothetical category and in practice.

Although it is undeniable that investigative reporting is basically good quality reporting, it has it's own particularities.

The name itself points to research, to a deeper, more analytical attitude towards the news, a topic, a phenomenon or a person.

We will try to explain what makes investigative reporting special by reminding you of an eternal dilemma:• is the role of a reporter simply to neutrally transfer the information from source to addressee, or should journalism, based on solid professional, ethical and moral criteria, try to explain and "fix" reality?

Utterly simplified, we could say that "standard" reporting is a transfer of information, while investigative reporting is "digging" under the surface. It is not an accident that the title of one of the best handbooks for investigative reporting is "Aim high, dig deep" by Lucinda Fleeson.

An investigative reporter "reads evidence"

One of the most important skills of a good reporter is the ability to simply, convincingly, and clearly explain what he/she wants to say. A good way to do so is by comparing with generally known information or everyday situations. If we would use this method to demonstrate what investigative reporting is, we could use, for example, police work as a comparison. Many reporters are like police officers: they regularly monitor the situation in their areas of responsibility and they react if something happens (so called beat reporters). In some cases police officers provide protection if needed and they also guard the crime scene, so that the witnesses do not remain unknown, and in order for the evidence not to be destroyed. If all the financial and organizational conditions allow it, this is performed by specially trained police officers. The work of a reporter is the same. Most reporters react to events in the way that they report about them. Those reporters who have a special skill in certain areas are specifically assigned to monitor the area of their expertise. Investigative reporters, as forensic criminologists, determine what has happened according to the existing «evidence», and very often predict what is going to happen.

However, they are not clairvoyants. Their powers are not supernatural, but they come from the fact that they know how to use special skills and methods. Just like forensic criminologists, they know how to "read evidence".

2. The definition of investigative reportingIs there a unique definition of investigative reporting?

No there is not. Media theoreticians, as well as reporters and editors who tried to write on this subject in accordance with their experience, have different approaches when it comes to attempting to define investigative reporting. Here are some of the common definitions:

• Investigative reporting is one of the hardest jobs of a reporter. It demands a lot of time and effort. At the same time it is exciting, interesting and rewarding.

• Investigative reporting is nothing else but exposing something that certain persons, companies or government agencies do not want the public to know.

• Investigative reporting enables setting right the injustices. It is based on the conviction that the editors, reporters and photo reporters can improve human rights and set the injustices right. (David Everett, Detroit Free Press)

• It is essential for the investigation to be performed by the reporter himself/herself, and not for the reporting to be based on the results of someone else's work and effort.

• The story must speak about something that is interesting for the readers, viewers or listeners; it must be about something that concerns them and their everyday life.

• It is important to expose information that someone is trying to hide from the public. (IRE/Investigative Reporters and Editors Handbook)

• An investigative story must contain the original work of the reporter, not just the retelling of someone else's discoveries. • An investigative story must point out the problems of a system, not simply an individual case.

• An investigative story must explain complex social issues, expose corruption, bad behavior and abuse of power. (Lucinda Fleeson, Aim high, dig deep)

• There are three levels of reporting. At the first, passive level the reporter reports on a public event and on something that has been said there.

• At the second level the reporter tries to explain or interpret what has happened or what has been said. • At the third level the reporter investigates the evidence on what has been said. In another words, reporting can be general, specialized or investigative.

• Investigative reporting tries to report on information that someone is trying to hide. An investigative reporter does not only search for common, non-controversial informants, but searches for those who know disturbing secrets, and are angry or upset enough to disclose them. (David Spark: Investigative Reporting - A study in technique: Focal Press / Linacre House - Oxford, Great Britain, 1999.)

Are there features of investigative reporting on which all reporters agree?
Yes, there are.

In spite of different approaches some elements are unavoidable in attempting to define the term investigative reporting. Therefore, as the most common definition we use a combination of different authors' ideas according to which (no matter what type of mass media we are talking about) the investigative story: • must be founded on the original investigative work of a reporter, • must expose information that an individual person, organization or government body is trying to hide from public knowledge, • point out to the problem of public interest with arguments.

3. Is every reporter an investigative reporter?

This is one more question to which reporters themselves do not have a unanimous answer. Eleven experienced reporters, members of "Investigative Reporters and Editors Inc." (IRA) tried to answer this question by checking three different statements:

• Every reporter is an investigative reporter

• Every reporter should be an investigative reporter• Every reporter can be an investigative reporter

It would be great if every reporter could be an investigative reporter, but unfortunately that is not true. Most of the reporters are not investigative reporters for numerous objective reasons. However, is it wise to say that every reporter should be an investigative reporter? Some reporters have to report on pets, savings of energy, etc. Therefore, every reporter can be an investigative reporter. There is nothing unusual about that. One only needs to be curious and have a need to know if the world is good or bad. (Steve Weinberg, The Reporter's Handbook - Bedford/St. Martin's, Boston-New York, 1996.)

Reporters who daily write or prepare radio and TV stories on pets or saving of energy can be investigative reporters.

In order for a story to satisfy investigative reporting criteria, it has to deal with a topic that is important not only for one person or close circle of people, but it has to be a result of research conducted by a reporter who investigated the subject, exposing information that someone tried to hide.

It is not crucial for the value of a story that a reporter's subject is corruption of a popular politician, or embezzlement in a local utility company.

A reporter reporting on pets can do so through, for example, stories on unusual pets, stories on people who dedicated their lives to animals or advice stories on how to buy a pet and take care of it. Such stories can be an excellent journalistic accomplishment but they are certainly not investigative reporting.

If the same reporter investigates ways of purchasing exotic pets from the foreign countries, and discovers and documents incidents of animal smuggling, animal abuse, corruption of customs officers, etc. that reporter has created an investigative story.
Therefore, every reporter can be investigative reporter, but only few are investigative reporters all the time.

4. The investigativa editor - a dancer on the string

Investigative reporting requires knowledge, skill, effort, but also time and money.

Why are money and time so important for investigative reporting?

If you want to investigate something that has purposely been hidden or you are seriously investigating something that no one has showed interest in, it is essential that you have more time than for a usual story.

The reason is the same as in the case of research of any kind: it is necessary sometimes to observe and check for a long time in order to notice and later on prove something that is otherwise hard to see or explain something that seemed completely confusing.

The longer the investigation takes, the higher the costs.

Hypothetically, it is possible to make a good investigative story in a short period of time and with low costs, but that is an exception to the rule, not the rule at all.

Time and money are especially important limiting elements because reporters do not have any influence over them.

A reporter can be highly educated, intelligent, literate, and skillful with all journalistic methods and available technical devices.

He/she can also be an expert on specific subjects, but if a reporter does not have enough time and money he/she will not be able to write a good quality investigative story.

There are only a few freelance reporters who chose to go into investigative reporting, working independently, selling stories to interested mass media, due to great expenses and required time.

For the same reason many editing offices and even many mass media centers do not employ journalists who would only do investigative reporting.

Only few editorial offices hire journalists whose main job is investigative reporting.

Also, rare are the publishers that can afford full-time teams to do investigative reporting.

If publishers, who can afford investigative reporters, want this business to be profitable for them, they have to be ready for one more expense - an investigative editor.

As every editor, an investigative editor should be an experienced journalist-reporter who works on subjects that are of interest to journalists-members of his team - that is investigative subjects.

But that actually means that an investigative editor should have all the characteristics decisive for the success of any editor specialized for a specific type of subject, because the investigative subject can be on culture, politics, crime, ecology, ballet, etc.

Is that realistically possible?

The proof that it is possible is one of the most successful investigative reporting editors, David Boardman (dboardman@seattletimes.com) who won numerous journalistic rewards with his research team.

With his research team from „The Seattle Times" he won the Pulitzer Prize several times, the most respectful journalistic praise to be awarded in the world, comparable with the Nobel Prize for achievements in science.

Along with publishing investigative stories in regular issues of « The Seattle Times» he occasionally prepares special issues of big investigative stories or issues, which compile all stories from a series of investigative articles dealing with specific problems.

By making a list of characteristics required for a successful editor, David Boardman affirms that an editor, if he/she wants to be successful, must take over many, sometimes contradictory roles.

Among others, Boardman explains, a successful editor has to be in his office: reporter, educator, teacher, student, psychiatrist, conductor, reader, librarian, diplomat, photo editor, graphical editor, defense attorney, prosecutor, humorist, confessor, etc. (Handbook: 20 HATS OF AN EFFECTIVE EDITOR)

A successful investigative editor also has to be a "long term" strategist and pragmatist/ tactician who has a clear plan, but know in every moment what to do if the plan is not coming to a close.

Work on an investigative story can be extremely frustrating. After long and hard work on a subject you can discover that you cannot make a story as you planned.

David Boardman's advice is: make an editorial plan of the whole project, constantly control it's results and possibilities, and do not hesitate to change the plan, even to drop the story if the analysis shows that you cannot control time, expenses or the story itself. Boardman prepared series of advice on how to imagine, develop and "launch" a successful investigative story (David Boardman; Birthing the Big Project)

WHAT TO INVESTIGATE?

1: FINANCIAL AND MONETARY FRAUDS (PRIVATE AND PUBLIC)

2: TAX EVASION

3: ELECTION FRAUDS

4:KICK BACK COMMISSION AND CORRUPTION

5:LAND AND PROPERTY FRAUD (CHEAP LEASE ETC)

6:OFFICIAL PROCUREMENT FRAUDS

7: AWARD OF CONTACT FOR MEGA PROJECTS

8:IRREGULARITIES IN HIGH LEVEL APPOINTMENT

 9: OFFSHORE ACCOUNTS OF POLITICIANS /BUREAU CRATES

10: SPURIOUS DRUGS NETWORK  

11: FAKE DEGREE AND SUBMISSION OF FAKE DOCUMENTS

12: FAULTY CONSTRUCTION OF GOVERNMENT BUILDING ROADS

13: MANAGING FIELD WORK AND INVESTIGATION PROCESS

MAJOR SOURCES OF INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING

1: HUMAN SOURCES

2: WRITTEN SOURCES 

HUMAN SOURCES
1: RIVALS (ENEMIES OR POLITICAL RIVALS)
2:LOSERS (IN ELECTION / TENDER ETC)
3: VICTIMS ( BANK / HOUSING FRAUD /HOSPITALS/FINANCIAL DEALS 

4: EXPERTS (CYBER EXPERTS/DEFENCE EXPERTS /AVIATION EXPERTS/COUNTER  TERRORISM EXPERTS/FIELD EXPERTS ETC)
5: INVESTIGATING OFFICERS(POLICE /CID /NAB /CIA )
6: DISAPPOINTED ELEMENTS IN BUREAUCRACY(PEOPLE WHO WERE IGNORED IN PROMOTION) 

7: COMMON MAN IN STREETS
8: SECURITY GUARDS
9: INTELLIGENCE OFFICIALS 
10: LEGAL EXPERTS 

WRITTEN RECORDS 
1: OFFICIAL RECORDS 
2: PRIVATE RECORDS

OFFICIAL RECORDS : official documents,summaries and files , agreements tenders any conspiracies .
notifications and appointment letters
minutes of the meetings 
official letters, memos, circulars with in federal and provincial governments 
bids and tenders 
PRIVATE RECORDS: bank account records , bank loan records,land records, corporation records, foreign NGOs ,tax returns and audit reports 

HURDLES AND OBSTACLES