Investigative Journalism

Investigative journalism grew out of the muckraking tradition established by Lincoln Steffens, Upton [Page 447]Sinclair, Samuel Hopkins Adams, Ida Tarbell, and others in the early 20th century. The muckrakers essentially created a new journalistic form, one that exposed social ills and government, personal, or corporate misbehavior.

Muckraking is known today by several names, including investigative journalism, depth reporting, precision journalism, and computer-assisted reporting. Most techniques used in investigative journalism are not much different from those used in other journalism. Investigative writers rely on interviews, records and documents, narrative leads, and vignettes, just as other journalists do.

The difference lies primarily in the purpose of investigative journalism (to expose misbehavior or problems) and the amount of space or time devoted to such reports. A newspaper might devote six complete pages and a broadcast outlet, 30 minutes over a week to compelling, important investigative reports. Social science methods also are used in many investigative reports; beat reporters rarely engage in the kinds of computations, analyses, and interpretations that investigative journalists use routinely.

One of hundreds of examples of investigative journalism is the Chicago Tribune's analysis of the relationship between patient deaths and hospital cleanliness. The Tribune pointed out that approximately 100,000 patients die each year because of dirty hands, instruments, and facilities. Moreover, the Tribune showed that hospitals have reduced by 25 percent their cleaning staffs since 1995. The Tribune studied health data from 75 federal and state agencies, court and hospital records, health organizations, and patient databases. The methods essentially were those used by epidemiologists.

Advocacy organizations and foundations, for which public relations practitioners work, sometimes use the techniques of investigative journalism to shine light on a pressing problem or issue.

The Center for Responsive Politics, the National Institute on Money in State Politics, and the Center for Public Integrity, for example, completed a massive study of the states' campaign spending practices during the 2000 elections. They found, among other things, that unregulated soft money was sometimes transferred to state party committees from federal party committees. This confirms “a commonly held perception that state parties are used to launder soft money and influence presidential and congressional elections in ways never envisioned nor intended by federal election laws” (Dunbar, Sylwester, & Moore, 2002, n.p.). Data from all 50 states were analyzed, hundreds of election officials were interviewed, Federal Election Commission data were analyzed, and hundreds of written records were collated and analyzed.

This and similar work is not done by a newspaper or broadcast station, but it is in effect investigative journalism. Public relations practitioners occasionally find themselves involved in such projects, if only to help write and disseminate the results.

Investigative journalism, of course, frightens practitioners who work in secretive, morally challenged organizations because they know an investigative writer might uncover an organization's dirty secrets. Practitioners in many hospitals, for example, probably were distraught to read the Tribune's series about dirty hospitals. Such publicity doesn't make an organization look good.