Please Don’t Call Me an Investigative Journalist
By Yvonne T. Chua
So I’ve churned out a few investigative reports, but that hardly qualifies me for the label best reserved for journalists who have dedicated their lives to muckraking. Like the journalist next door, I prefer writing a mix of reports—news, feature, explanatory and, yes, investigative—on serious and not-so-serious concerns.
If I happen to have produced slightly more investigative stories than other journalists, that has to do with my having worked for more than a decade for an institution that specializes in investigative journalism. Hence, my foray into investigative reporting once or twice a year.
These sporadic incursions have given me cause to feel squeamish when some journalists dismiss outright investigative reporting as a nonexistent genre of journalism. Critics of investigative journalism conveniently mouth journalism guru Curtis MacDougall’s famous line: “All reporting is investigative (as the news gatherer seeks facts).” It makes me wonder: What do we then make of he-said, she-said and similar accounts that tend to dominate the news hole, or downright trivial stories like a telefantaserye queen worrying about her ailing father?
Many important ingredients go into the making of an investigative report. Here’s one right out of MacDougall’s writings: “Uncovering something somebody wants to keep secret.” But renowned American investigative journalist Robert Greene best sums up the essence of investigative reporting when he describes it as “the reporting, through one’s own work, product and initiative, matters of importance which some persons or organizations wish to keep secret.”
Greene’s formula is so widely accepted it has become the working definition of the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility, the U.S.-based Investigative Reporters and Editors, and other respected media organizations when they scour each year for outstanding investigative reports that deserve recognition.
Running stories
Still, misconceptions about investigative reporting abound. Alas, many people, journalists included, equate investigative reports strictly with the multi-part or long-form reports packaged by special reports teams or special assignments reporters of newspapers and television programs, and by specialized groups like the Philippine Center of Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) and Newsbreak.
As a consequence, running stories that are investigative in nature but aren’t branded as “Special Reports” almost always get overlooked for what they truly are, even by discerning awards-giving bodies. And to think that Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein had long shattered this stereotype with their marvelous investigation of the Watergate break-in.
At home and in the year just past, the running investigative reports on the “Hello, Garci” tapes assiduously put together by a handful of news organizations are analogous to the “Woodstein” stories. Even the PCIJ was forced to move out of the “series” mode—a first—when the wiretapping controversy broke so it could quickly release its findings on the trail of the tapes, the post-election cheating in Muslim Mindanao provinces, the identities of the people caught on the tapes, the use of government funds in the electoral campaign, and the failings of the Commission on Elections.
An oft-asked question: Can any journalist do investigative reporting?
Yes, if he or she wants to. It pays, though, to be in a news-room that encourages and sup-ports this brand of journalism.
Support means not merely the creation of a special reports team that makes investigative reporting the exclusive preserve of a select group of reporters. Support also means giving every reporter who so desires, particularly beat reporters, an equal shot at investigative reporting by releasing them from the heavy demands of day-to-day reporting, at least for the duration of the investigation. More importantly, support means having skilled and sympathetic, yet no-nonsense editors hold a reporter’s hand or get reporters who are at odds with one another to work as a team until the project ripens.
Sleuthing
A journalist jittery about embarking on an investigation would do well to set aside the mistaken notion that investi-gative reports always ought to be earthshaking as to unseat a corrupt president (read: Estrada), have a crooked general court-martialed (read: General Garcia), or get a flawed multi-billion-peso deal rescinded (read: PEA-Amari). There are many equally fascinating and meaningful stories worth probing. Like this report on water being pilfered, it turned out, not so much by squatter communities but by giant corporations, malls, hotels and other big commercial, industrial and residential users, and how small consumers bear the cost of the large-scale thievery. Or this story about a mayor who bans artificial contraceptives in his city, depriving women a choice of family-planning methods and forcing nongovernmental organizations to give out contraceptives on the sly and under the table.
Coming up with reports like these, however, demands heightened alertness on the part of reporters to possible wrongdoing, abuse of power, uneven relationships, as well as unjust, improper or anti-society acts, plus a relentless drive to uncover the modus operandi, the culprits and the victims, the reasons or motives, and the consequences. The rule is to not wait for the proverbial manna to fall from heaven—a tip from a whistleblower or an assignment from the desk—but to be led by that journalistic, sleuthing nose.
Many investigative projects don’t start out as such. For example, a routine assignment to write a 1,500-word feature on a state-employed barrio doctor (The editor’s instruction: One doctor, former or current, would do as long as the subject is in Manila to save costs) ended up being a three-part report on corruption and misplaced priorities in public health among local politicians. Scanning government statistics on a lazy afternoon culminated in a two-part story about the alarming dropout rate among boys from high schools and what have become of the lives of some dropouts. Really, a lot of stories are right under a reporter’s nose.
The job of investigating is certainly made easier if the journalist is familiar with the topic and the territory. That gives beat reporters a natural advantage—so long as they haven’t become jaded to see the story, chummy with people who may need to be investigated, or mired in the “pack journalism” culture. But for journalists working on a subject for the first time, the learning period is shortened if the determination is there.
Experience in conducting investigations also works to one’s favor. The first project is always the most difficult. The feeling of being lost, especially when there’s no senior journalist to walk with you, can be overpowering. But on the nth project, seasoned investigators become strategists of sorts and adroitly plot their moves like generals going to battle.
Arsenal of skills
The bigger the arsenal of journalistic skills, the better armed a reporter is to undertake investigative reporting, and even come up with reports beyond the usual fare. At the minimum, reporters should have mastered the art of interviewing, searching and analyzing documents, and observing to pull off a decent investigation.
Knowledge and use of spreadsheets, database managers, and statistical software bring investigations to a different plane, especially if the journalist dreams to be in the league of Donald Barlett and James Steele, the duo widely acclaimed for the “database journalism” or “expert journalism” they have done for the Philadelphia Inquirer and Time magazine. In the Philippines, application of mapping software has enabled one giant television network to pinpoint on its own exact locations of fire-, flood- , traffic- and car theft-prone areas in the metropolis, and even narrow down to just nine the number of provinces most vulnerable to bird flu.
Investigations, however, will come to naught if the story is lost in the telling. That is why good investigators who are likewise good writers enjoy an edge. That is why good editors ought to help good investigators but poor writers fashion their piece. That is why organizing the voluminous data long before wrapping up the investigation is a big help. That is why devices such as diagramming and outlining often come in handy in mapping the story.
But beyond the knowledge and skills requisite of investigative reporting is something far more important: strict adherence to ethical standards. Investigative journalists struggle to stay beyond reproach, avoiding even so-called “small” lapses or indiscretions—such as affiliations that can be wrongly perceived as clouding their judgment—that they know can lead to their undoing.
A three-time first-prize winner in the Jaime V. Ongpin Awards for Excellence in Journalism, Yvonne T. Chua also teaches at the University of the Philippines College of Mass Communication. She was training director of the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism.
Comments are closed.