What is investigative journalism?

Gunel Orujalieva

scientist of the laboratory of scientific

investigation “Journalism”, 

a Doctor’s degree 

In the view of Journalismfund there is no final definition of investigative journalism. On the contrary – it should be a vivid process to strive for investigative journalism and any definition must be scrutinised over and over in an ongoing debate among journalists. However we would like to contribute to this debate by adding some crucial points from several parts of Europe. Research – proper research will give you focus and help you to decide who you'll target for key interviews. If you haven't done your research it will be obvious when you start interviewing. You will lose credibility and those you are interviewing will be less likely to open up. Make sure you are up to speed with new developments; know the background; know the key players and people who will talk; know what has been reported already. Remember that you are looking for a new angle, new information - something different that will take the story forward.

Sources – begin with background reading. Check out official documents, such as laws, regulations, court documents, the records of an individual's, organisation's or institution's dealings, such as correspondence, meeting minutes or transcripts, internal reports, contracts or financial records, and original materials on which other research or reports are based, such as the first publication of the results of scientific investigations, surveys, fieldwork or interviews. Consult government or parliament documents and records - laws and legal acts are also often accessible on government web sites. Check websites of NGOs or international organisations before calling them for an interview. Their reports and documents posted online will help inform your questions. Be careful with opinion polls. Often those are commissioned by government or political parties. Check carefully the background of the organisation that produced the poll and the methodology used.

Remember to spread your net wide. It is important to represent the interests of different groups, even if minor and/or unpleasant. Doing so means your article will be balanced. But beware. It is easy to get lost in piles of research material and to lose your focus. Know when to stop researching and start interviewing.

As you accumulate material, think constantly of your angle. If you're following up a story that's already had an outing, what do you have to add? Ensure you are clear on what is unique and special.

Setting up interviews and interviewing - interviews in person are always preferable. If that's not possible, then speaking by phone is also fine but never - unless there is no other option - interview by email. If you do, make very clear in the copy that any quotes you use were obtained by email. If you're recording also take notes at the same time. It forces you to listen and acts as a back-up if the recorder fails. It can also save time later, meaning you may not need to transcribe the entire interview. Save all notes and tape recordings until well after the story is published. If anyone challenges your work, your notebooks will back you up.

Experts – start off with the so-called experts. Expert sources will include journalists, activists, independent researchers, scientists, government investigators, academics and authors. Remember that experts may have an agenda so check and double check everything you are told. Examine their links with political parties, governments, business interests and check their previous statements/reports to judge how reliable their analysis is. Former officials who have left a company can be a great source of information. They have the inside track and no longer fear losing their job if they speak out. They may also be able to connect you with current insiders. But again question their motives. Why did they leave?

Remember to ask anyone you speak about who else may know about the subject. Get their phone number and email, then use the name of the original source (if they are happy with this) when making contact. Don't focus entirely on experts. Each story needs a human face, someone personally affected by the problem, a victim. NGOs or local media outlets might be able to help you find someone, but in the case of NGOs also be careful of their motives and agenda. Schedule interviews with potentially hostile or evasive subjects for near the end of your research as you will be better prepared to question and challenge their remarks. This is particularly true when interviewing governmental representatives. Always do them last as they will be among the trickiest interviews.

Interviewing the vulnerable – be extra sensitive when interviewing trauma victims. Set up the interview through someone they trust. Take extra time. Find a secure place to interview them. If the person refuses to speak to you, don't insist. Respectfully explain why you feel their story needs to be told (for example, that it may help other survivors). If they still refuse, leave your contact details in case they change their mind later.

Proceed with special caution when dealing with children. Your overriding concern must be to protect the child from harm. Decide first if the interview is strictly necessary in telling your story. If possible obtain permission from a parent, guardian, school or local authority before beginning an interview. Be particularly careful when speaking to minors involved in court cases. There are usually strict prohibitions on identifying them and you could find yourself in contempt of court. A child is usually considered a minor until the age of 18. Adjust your style. Direct questions often don't work and a more effective approach is to allow them to speak in a less structured way, ideally in a child-friendly environment. Remember, children often tell adults what they think they want to hear, so be patient. Children who have suffered trauma will need extra time to tell their story. Get down to their eye level. Proceed slowly and carefully and be alert for signs of anxiety.

Preparing your questions – it may emerge after several interviews that your original premise doesn't stand up. If this happens, don't be afraid to adjust your focus, even change the idea completely, rather than struggle to make the original angle work. If this happens notify your editor. Asking the right questions – prepare a list of basic questions of the main points you want to cover. It may seem obvious, but many journalists don't do it. However, always be ready to improvise and adapt - don't stick rigidly to your list. If the interview turns in an unexpected direction be ready to drop your original line of questioning.

Many interviewees will want to see your questions in advance. Decide on a case-by-case basis if you will comply. Technical questions that require some research is an example of when this approach could be useful. However, giving too much away might kill spontaneity. It could also inhibit you if you feel you must stick to an agreed list of questions. Avoid outlining your questions in advance if at all possible, particularly when interviewing politicians or public figures.

While interviewing, remember to listen. Thinking about what you will ask next while the subject is still answering the previous question is a common mistake and means you could miss important information. When possible avoid leading questions - questions which subtly prompt the interviewee to respond in a particular way. For example, ask “what did you see”, not, “you saw the soldier shoot the man, didn't you?” Use open-ended rather than close-ended questions. An example of a closed-ended question: Who will you vote for this election? An example of an open-ended question: What do you think about the two candidates in this election? Long and rambling questions will often elicit long and rambling answers, or allow the interviewee to duck the question entirely, so be short and precise. At the end of the interview a good question to ask can be, “Who else should I speak to about this topic?” and "What have I not asked you that I should have asked you?” Remember, an informal chat at the end, tape recorder turned off and pencil put down, often produces useful information. Quickly check your notes before walking away or hanging up. If you don't understand, ask again. If you don't get it, how will the editor or the reader?

On and off the record – make sure the interviewee has given informed consent and understands the meaning of the terms 'on the record' and 'off the record'. Check several times throughout the interview what information is on and what is off the record - especially if the interviewee starts giving details that could put them, or others, at risk. Try and stay 'on the record' where possible.

Use anonymous sources sparingly. There may be times when it is the only way to get someone to speak but be aware that too many unnamed sources will weaken your story. Never pay for information or interviews. Familiarise yourself with local laws and customs relating to your topic. 

It is your responsibility to inform yourself about the political, physical and social terrain in which you will be working. For example, in some countries, covert use of a tape recorder is illegal. Stay within the law when reporting your story. It may be tempting to break the rules to illustrate your point, or to get the story, but this will leave you vulnerable and could even undermine your credibility in the long run. Telephone taps, breaking and entering, and hacking should not be used. Remember, journalists are observers and reporters of events, not active participants: spectators at the match not supporters of one team or the other.

Going undercover – there may be times when you wish to conceal your identity as a journalist in order to gain a different perspective on the story. Undercover journalism can be a force for social change, uncovering a problem that would never have been brought to light by any other means. But by sacrificing transparency and honesty you could leave yourself open to criticism about your methods or even your conclusions. “When deciding whether to go undercover, to obtain information through deceptive means, you should ask yourself various questions”. [1, p.128] Is the information you will obtain strongly linked to a broader social purpose and is it of vital public interest? Does the public value of this information outweigh the deception and potential violations of privacy? Could you obtain this information through straightforward means, and have you exhausted all other ways of getting this information? Always inform your editor in advance who you will be meeting, when, where and when you will be back. Agree a time by when you will check in, and then make sure you do.

Leave a list of contacts with your editor detailing who you would like to be contacted in the event of an emergency. If you plan to be gone for more than a day, work out a plan to call a designated person (editor, spouse, partner, parent) every 24 hours. Your failure to call by an appointed time should trigger phone calls to emergency contacts. Several people - including colleagues in the field and back in the office - should also be provided with the list of emergency contacts, as well as detailed instructions for how to get in touch with them. Ideally set up interviews via people you know and trust, however social networking sites and online forums can be highly useful in developing new contacts. Always meet contacts obtained this way in a public place, informing your editor of who you will be meeting and when you will be back.

Staying safe during your investigation – always carry press identification. In some countries a signed and stamped letter from your editor outlining your mission could be useful and can be provided. Carry a mobile phone with emergency numbers pre-set for speed dialling. If travelling in the countryside, or far from medical help, carry a first aid kit (know how to use it) and a torch. Always check your spare tire before setting out. Sensitive files, documents, discs, video and audio recordings should be stored in a secure place.

Limit phone interviews to non-sensitive information. Journalists should always be cautious when using mobile telephones as they are not secure. Remember that using email to communicate may not be secure either. Journalists should respect local sensibilities. Dress in a manner which is appropriate to the local culture. Ideally, journalists who do not know the local language, should travel with a qualified interpreter who can help them communicate and understand local customs. Journalists should also learn and be able to pronounce the words for press or journalist in local languages.

What to do if you are arrested – know your rights: you have the right to remain silent and to be assisted by a competent and independent lawyer of your choice. You have the right not to be subjected to torture, intimidation, deceit, other forms of coercive harassment. You have the right to be informed of these rights and to be told that anything you say may be used against you in court.

Organising your material – you must always work from a detailed article outline. An outline is a roadmap; a logical and schematic summary are essential when writing a long piece. Begin by transcribing recordings and typing out hand-written notes so that all material for your story is in front of you in a clear, easy-to-read format. Then highlight the most relevant sections in your interview notes and all other documents to which you will refer, for example reports, web pages or emails. The highlighted information should then be slotted into an article outline. Time spent preparing a good outline will cut many hours from the writing process. The more detailed and carefully thought out your outline is, the more organised the piece will be.The first sentence in the outline should be your lead. This is the point from which the entire outline, and article, will flow. Each paragraph in the outline must then support the lead, with each paragraph flowing logically from one to another. The basic structure of the outline is simple and mirrors the structure of the story itself - beginning [lead] - middle [body] - end [conclusion]. This may sound oversimplified but it is amazing how often journalists forget these basic components of a story. As with the outline, time spent working out the lead long before you start writing the article will save hours later and help prevent an unfocused final product.

Writing your story – remember your structure - beginning (lead), middle (body), end (conclusion). Keep in mind, “Tell them what you are going to tell them; tell them the story; tell them you have told them”. [3, p.57] The lead must grab the reader's attention, explain what has happened and why it is important. If you have no lead then you will have no focus and the story will not work.

A good feature lead should capture the mood, create an image, appeal to the imagination, instantly transport the reader to the location. The body of the story draws readers into the piece. Each paragraph follows on logically from the previous one, building the argument, referring back to the lead. Remember: you are developing a narrative intended to draw in the reader. Each new paragraph should introduce a new point or topic and keep transitions smooth. Use linking words such as however, soon after and meanwhile, allows you to subtly move from topic to topic. Be selective with the information you include. You don't have to use everything in your notebook. Avoid duplication, repetition, non-essential information. Avoid long, rambling quotes. Used sparingly, quotes can have a more dramatic effect. Select the poignant sentence, the meaningful or relevant phrase. Don't get bogged down with unnecessary background and irrelevant details. Be selective, but use lively language and plenty of detail to describe places and scenes.

The conclusion – he conclusion is the end, not a place for any new information or surprises.Remind reader why the story is important. Give them a feeling of “closure”, of coming full circle to the opening paragraph.

Writing best practice – an active voice is always more interesting that a passive voice. Don't start each paragraph with the subject which can be monotonous. Subsidiary clauses can also be used at the beginning of paragraphs. Keep sentences short and uncomplicated.

Emotive words – watch your words and avoid sensationalism and sensational language. Avoid heavily slanted adjectives like “arrogant” or “warlord”. Avoid imprecise use of emotive words to describe what has happened to people. For example, “massacre” - the deliberate killing of people known to be unarmed and defenceless. Are we sure? Or might these people have died in battle? Always be precise about what you know. Do not minimise suffering but reserve the strongest language for the gravest situations or you will help to justify disproportionate responses which escalate the violence. Avoid demonising adjectives like “vicious”, “cruel”, “brutal”, “barbaric”. These always describe one party's view of what another party has done. To use them puts the journalist on that side and helps to justify an escalation of violence. Instead, report what you know about the wrongdoing and give as much information as you can about the reliability of other people's reports or descriptions of it. Avoid demonising labels such as “terrorist”; “extremist”; “fanatic” or “fundamentalist”. These are always given by “us” to “them”. No one ever uses them to describe himself or herself and so for a journalist to use them is always to take sides. Instead try calling people by the names they give themselves. Or be more precise in your descriptions. Avoid making an opinion or claim seem like an established fact.

Ethics (privacy) – people - their strengths but usually their weaknesses - are what make up our stories. Reuters reminds its journalists that “the people who make the news are vulnerable to the impact of our stories. In extreme cases, their lives or their reputations could depend on our reporting”. [5, p.39] This is worth remembering when considering issues relating to privacy. Privacy is defined by the Oxford English dictionary as the state of being private and undisturbed; a person's right to this; freedom from intrusion or public attention; avoidance of publicity. Think how you would feel if the story were about you.

Impartiality, balance, accuracy – ensure your pieces are balanced by representing all sides of the story. Give those criticised the chance to respond. You must represent all sides, without bias. The journalist should be separate from the story. Keep your opinions out of your stories but be aware that 100% impartiality is impossible. 

Accuracy means precision about everything - from spelling names and citing numbers to reporting what was said in the right context, without exaggeration.

Accuracy is betrayed by using unreliable sources or sources with a hidden interest and by failing to independently verify or double-source information. The lack of double-sourcing turns journalism into rumour-mongering, disinformation and propaganda. Inaccuracy betrays the media's single greatest attribute, its credibility. Citizens will neither believe the media nor tell journalists the truth about events if they fear being misquoted, misinterpreted or maligned.

Plagiarism and defamation – always use your own reporting. Rewriting material from other media is a minefield and leaves you open to allegations of plagiarism or even libel. Plagiarism is the intentional and unintentional use of someone else's words or ideas without acknowledgment (Purdue University's Online Writing lab). It is a serious breach of journalistic ethics and at most international news organisations a journalist found to be plagiarising would be fired. Defamation is causing harm to an individual's reputation, either on a personal or professional level. Defamation when it's written down is called libel, and slander when it is verbal. According to The Associated Press Stylebook and Libel Manual, the vast majority of libel cases are the result of a published allegation of crime, incompetence or immorality. And the majority of these cases can be linked to the usage of erroneous, vague or inexact language.

Резюме

Автор в статье рассматривает проблемы жанров в национальной медиа сруктуре, его образование и исторического развитие. Также, выделяет особенности развитие современной журналистки, затрагивает жанровые вопрсы и элементы журналистского расследования.

Ключевые слова: жанр, журналистка, СМИ, журналистское расследования.

Resume

In the article author looks through genre problems in the structure of national media, development of it’s arising and history. Also, problems of development features of the modern journalism, genre and elements of journalist investigation are marked.
Key words: genre, journalism, press, investigative journalism.

References
1. James S. Ettema, Theodore Lewis Glasser. Investigative journalism and public virtue. 1998.
2. Steve Weinberg. The reporter's handbook: An investigator's guide to documents and techniques. 1996.
3. John Pilger. Tell me no lies: Investigative journalism that changed the world. 2005.
4. Bill Kovach, Tom Rosenstiel. The elements of journalism: What newspeople should know and the public should expect. 2001.
5. Ben H. Bagdikian. The media monopoly. 2000.
6. Hugo de Burgh. Investigative journalism: context and practice. 2000.