Is Work of the Investigative Journalist Glamorous - Essay Example

Members of the public are often deluded into believing that the work of the investigative journalist is glamorous, not to mention high-paying. Afterall, it is the investigative journalist that they see on their television screens, reporting breaking news from faraway places; it is the investigative journalist who uncovers government corruption and exposes the lies spoken by presidents and statesman; and it is the investigative journalist who brings us the truth despite all, often governmental, efforts to conceal it. What few stop to consider, or reflect upon, is the dangers which investigative journalists are exposed to. Global statistics, as researched by and presented in the Columbia Journalism Review (2006) indicated that in 2005, a conservative figure of 1200 journalists were murdered, killed, arrested and imprisoned for doing their job: exposing the truth. Their enemies include groups of people who would never otherwise be grouped together: law and order officials and petty criminals and, statesmen and crime lords to name but a few. The dangers which investigative journalists confront are only compounded by the fact that the media organisations they are affiliated to are increasingly incapable of providing them the support or the protection needed. The implication is that if they are kidnapped, the payment of the required ransom is slim and compliance with the any of the kidnappers’ demands is a virtual impossibility; if they are arrested, the capacity of the organisation in question to act in their defence is minimal, especially vis-à-vis foreign governments and; if they `disappear,’ as investigative journalists often do, their organisations are rarely able to `find’ them. Within the context of the stated, the real question is why, year after, young and aspiring journalists join the ranks of investigative journalists. As may be inferred from the literature on the topic, and as shall be argued in this research, the answer to this question is found in that which investigative journalism symbolises, its principles and, ultimately, that which it achieves. Indeed, even though some are motivated to join the ranks of investigative journalism because of the associate fame, glamour and financial rewards, the majority are attracted to it because they perceive of journalism as a vocation which allows them a strategy for the exercise of social responsibility and the safeguarding of societal welfare. Understanding the attractions of investigative journalism is partially predicated on understanding the very nature of this branch of journalism. As argued by de Burgh (2000), not only may investigative journalism be defined as that branch of journalism which is responsible for the exposition of issues of public concern and the uncovering and propagation of the truth but, it is that which journalism is supposed to be. The responsibility of the media, the fourth estate, extends beyond the coverage and reporting of that which unfolds, or is announced, within the public sphere to the investigation of the truth of, and behind, the aforementioned. It is, in otherwise, not concerned with reporting and covering as much as it is with the investigation of that which is officially reported and, more often than not, that which stakeholders are determined to keep from the public (de Burgh, 2000). It is as such that investigative journalism is defined as a branch of media whose primary purpose is the attraction of “attention to failures within society’s systems of regulation and to the ways in which those systems can by circumvented by the rich, the powerful and the corrupt” (de Burgh, 2000, 3). On the basis of this alone, one can assume that the reason why young and aspiring journalists join the ranks of investigative journalists every year is inextricably linked to their realisation of the importance of the stated goal and their associate determination to expose the truth. Proceeding from the above stated, it is evident that the immediate correlation between the higher purposes of journalism and the functions of investigative journalism function as an attraction for young journalists. As Protess et al. (2005) assert, the history of investigative journalism is as old as the history of journalism for one simple reason: the roots of journalism, its origins are, and lie in investigative journalism. If the media is to truly function as the fourth estate, if it is to be the “watchdog” it is required, as a profession, to be, it must engage in investigation as opposed to reporting and covering (Protess et al., 2005). Concuring with this argument, Ettema and Glasser (1998) maintain that proper journalism is investigative in nature and all other forms are mere perversions. Within the context of the stated, investigative journalism is not a career as much as it is a vocation and on the basis of the stated, the work of investigative journalists can be more accurately defined as the eyes and ears of society and their role as the “custodians of conscious” (Ettema and Glasser, 1998, 3). It is the aspiration and the ambition to constructively contribute to the betterment of society, to stand against corruption and injustice which, among other things, attracts the investigative journalist to the profession. The founding principles of investigative journalism, as which enforce the dual role of reporter and investigator upon journalists, further fortifies arguments to the effect that the functions of this branch of journalism, while integral to the well-being of societies, expose its practitioners to danger. As Molenhoff (1981, 2) writes in Investigative Reporting, “the survival of … democracy is to a large degree contingent upon whether … people understand the problems of their society.” To understand these problems, they first have to learn the truth about these problems and how they negatively influence society as a whole and all of its members. This is precisely what the investigative journalist does; he investigates the truth and explains the problem, in an objective “honest, responsible, fair and nonpartisan” style (Molenhoff, 1981, 2). Doing so, however, is not easy because the investigative journalists’ goal is to expose truths that are hidden. This means that members of this field of journalism often have to act as criminal investigators. This is an extremely difficult task for two reasons. In the first place, investigative reporters, like criminal investigators are feared and not liked, meaning that few people will be willing to cooperate with their investigations (Molenhoff, 1982). In the second place, and much more difficult than in the case of crimes, the investigative journalist has no evidence that something wrong has been committed, as in that a lie has been stated or that corruption has occurred. Therefore, the investigative journalist needs to examine and critically analyze almost all government reports and statements, among other things (Molenhoff, 1982). On the basis of the stated, two things are evident. The first is that the principles upon which investigative journalism are founded are g the search for the truth, the investigation of claims made by officials to ensure that they are stating the truth and report it if they are not, to identify the weaknesses in a political and legal system and how officials and powerful people abuse these weaknesses and, importantly, awaken public awareness regarding corruption or lies only if it is relevant to public interest and welfare or the welfare of the country as a whole. The second inference is that the satisfaction of these principles, while contributing to the well-being of society, poses as a threat to the well-being of investigative journalists. As may be deduced from the foregoing, investigative journalism is dangerous and the execution of its responsibilities entails making enemies of the rich and the powerful, of governments and criminals. The good investigative journalist makes enemies because he exposes the truth, shows a society how its richer and more powerful members have been able to lie, cheat, break the law or act against public interest and escape prosecution. Naturally, the people, institutions and officials whom investigative reporters have exposed, are immediately defined as their enemies and, as such, pose as a threat to the well-being of the journalists in question. According to Millman (1992), Argentina, noted for the large numbers of investigative journalists who simply disappeared or were found murdered while investigating government corruption, owes both its political and economic reforms to its investigative journalists. Over the past two decades, the country’s investigative journalists, chief among which is Horatio Verbitsky, have exposed government complicity and responsibility for the `disappearance’ of tens of thousands of citizens, have brought down government officials by proving corruption and theft and, have revealed countless of instances where ministries have conspired with big business and, in so doing, undermined societal welfare (Millman, 1992). Noting that the Argentinean government had, quite openly, informed the nation’s investigative journalists that they were on its hit list and were, if they continued to attack the government, going to face the Death Squad, the question is why these journalists persisted. According to Verbitsky, they persisted because they did not have a choice. They were compelled by both the nature of their chosen profession and their own characters, to fight in defence of their country, their society and the very principles upon which justice is founded upon, through the exposition of the truth (cited in Waisbord, 2000). Disputing the notion that investigative journalists are particularly heroic and, as a result, capable of confronting dangers without flinching, Verbitsky recalls that he spent the better part of two decades in hiding, fearing the death squad, not wanting to `disappear.’ He, nevertheless, continued to investigate and write because of his unshakeable belief in this as a duty owed to his country and society and his faith in the notion of a better tomorrow were he to expose the evils of today (cited in Waisbord, 2000). Research indicates that Verbitsky’s sentiments are not uniquely his but shared by investigative journalists in much of the world. Egypt, one of the most moderate of the Middle Eastern governments and, without doubt, one of the more `democratic’ and tolerant of these governments, consistently and persistently targets investigative journalists for persecution and prosecution. As Abdallah (2003) notes, in 2003, Rida Hilal, an investigative reporter, simply disappeared following his announcement of the pending publication of his investigation on government corruption, complete with supporting documents (Abdallah, 2003). In that same year, the government actively cracked down on all investigative journalists who reported government corruption. In one instance, the government deliberately ignored a court finding of innocence and order for the release of an investigative journalist held in custody and imprisoned him (Reporters without Borders, 2004). In consideration of the fact that Egypt is the more moderate and tolerant of the Arab countries, the fact that the practice of investigative journalism in this region is dangerous, is hardly surprising. It is still practiced, however, and journalists still choose to embrace this trend of reporting because it constitutes both a protest against corruption and a struggle for freedom. While not all investigative journalists are targeted by their own governments, the very entities which are supposed to protect their rights and guarantee their freedom of speech, their determined efforts to expose the truth places endanger their lives. The Australian investigative journalist with The Sunday Age, Bill Birnbauer, has made enemies of law enforcement, big business and organised crime, through his investigation and subsequent exposition of the linkage between big tobacco and organised crime, and law enforcement’s handling of the Port Arthur Massacre (ICIJ, 2006). The implication here is clearly that investigative reporting is dangerous insofar as it involves the creation of powerful enemies but, it is, nevertheless, integral to the well-being of societies, the protection of populations from government corruption and, ultimately, the safeguarding of democracy. It would be a misrepresentation of the reality, however, were one to contend that all investigative journalists espoused this style of reporting because of their sense of patriotism, commitment to justice and social responsibility. Some join the ranks of investigative journalism for no other reason than the opportunity it afford for front page news and the associate fame. A prime example is the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal. As Fleming (2000) points out, the publication of this story and the exposure of the President’s lie served no constructive purpose and, indeed, were one to fully explore its consequences, one would realise that it harmed America’s reputation abroad, not to mention the credibility of its president. Investigative journalists uncovered and exposed this affair, not because of their commitment to social responsibility or their determination to expose the lies of public officials but, because exposition translated into front page coverage and journalistic credit, not to mention fame, however temporarily, and money. Indeed, there are countless examples to evidence the claim that many young journalists embrace investigative journalism for self-aggrandizement and, in so doing, reduce the profession to yellow journalism. Lisa Pryor, a Sydney Morning Herald investigative journalist who took it upon herself to run a series denigrating articles on the therapy profession in Australia, is a case in point. As O’Keefe (2005) a media communications scholar explains, Pryor’s articles, claiming to be the truth as uncovered by research, investigation and undercover operations, were ultimately exposed as nothing other than fabrications. That is not the point, however. The real issue is that this journalist perverted the meaning of investigative journalism into a license to present personal opinions on the therapy profession in Australia, complete with the claim that the majority of the nation’s therapists were con-artists, just so she could get a front-page byline, fame and, of course, money. What this means is that investigative journalism is not, for all, a vocation but, the path to fame, fortune and, of course, glamour. As may be deduced from the foregoing, investigative journalism does fulfil a higher social and political purpose. Many join its ranks, irrespective of the associate dangers because they have a “higher kind of loyalty” to their society and country than do most others (de Burgh, 2000, 3). Generalisations, however, are fallacious, making it impossible to claim that all join the profession for this specific reason. Indeed, if many join the ranks of the investigative journalists because of their commitment to the principles of the profession, others join it because of fame, money and front page coverage. Bibliography Abdallah, A. (2003) Egypt Before and After September 11, 2001: Problems of Political Transformation in A Complicated International Setting. Deutsches Orient-Institut im Verbund Deutsches Übersee-Institut. Retrieved 25 May 2007 from http://www.mafhoum.com/press7/194P52.pdf CJR (2006) `Hard Numbers.’ Columbia Journalism Review, 44(6). De Burgh, H. (2000) Investigative Journalism: Context and Practice. London: Routledge. Ettema, J. S., and Glasser, T.L. (1998) Custodians of Conscience. New York: Columbia University Press. Fleming, C. (20000 `Journalism and new technology.’ in Investigative Journalism: Context and Practice. Ed., Hugo de Burgh. London: Routledge, 2000. ICIJ (2006) `Members’ biography.’ The Centre for Public Integrity. Retrieved 25 May 2007 from http://www.publicintegrity.org/icij/bios.aspx?act=bios Millman, J. (19920 `Argentina; A fix on Corruption.’ Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved 25 May 2007 from http://backissues.cjrarchives.org/year/92/3/argentina.asp Mollenhoff, C. R. (1981) Investigative Reporting. London: Macmillan Publishing Co. O’Keefe, T. (2005) The Lisa Pryor Effect of hypnotic journalistic terrorism: Rebuttal and meta-analysis.’ Hypnosis Australia. Retrieved 31 may 2007 from http://www.hypnosisaustralia.com.au/lisapryor.htm Protess, D.L. et al. (2005) The Journalism of Outrage: Investigative Reporting and Agenda-Building in America. New York: The Guilford Press. RSF (2004) `Egypt: Annual report.’ Reporters Without Borders. Retrieved 25 May 2007 from http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=9924 Waisbord, S. (2000) Watchdog Journalism in South America. New York: Columbia University Press. Read More