The Difference Between Investigative Journalism and Routine Journalism

8/13/2019 The Difference Between Investigative Journalism and Routine Journalism

1/5


2/5

Journalism offers a broad field of profession. You cannot only separate between topics,

resorts and its quality (tabloid, broadsheet), but also various types of journalism.

Investigative journalism is often seen as the supreme discipline, because it is probably the

most dangerous and effortful. Nevertheless this essay will explain why both types are

essential for a democracy and explore the main differences between investigative and

routine journalism by showing two examples.

Table of Contents

Routine journalism 1

Investigative journalism 2

Can routine journalism be investigative? 2

Example 1: Answering a question by not answering a question 3

Example 2: When breaking the law is the only way 3

Conclusion and the difference of investigative and daily journalism 4

Bibliography 4

Routine journalismDefining routine journalism is easy, achieving it is a challenge: Journalisms purpose is to inform

citizens. In a democracy we are the ones in power and decide. For doing this we need truly and

independent researched information. Or how BBC News Head James Harding (2013) puts it: People

are depending on clear information and the opportunity to question those in control. The BBC *or

any other media is able to do so] is providing this democratic function. The German sociologist

Jrgen Habeas invented the often-cited public sphere model of what classic journalism is and should

do. From this perspective, media should prepare citizens to participate in public life by serving

information which is in the public interest. (Croteau and Hoynes 2006) Or how Dorothy Byrne who

went as a student to West Africa put it: There are really important things in the world thatpeople

must know about, and if you dont tell them about them then they wont know and they wont be

able to do anything about them. (De Burg 2008, pp. 19) Ideally, you do not have to break the law or

have to do a lot of research to find out such important things. That is what mainly daily journalism

does: Collecting and editing information and presenting it through media to inform people.

Investigative journalism goes beyond.


3/5

Investigative journalism

What if there are pieces of information which are in the public interest, but not easily or not at all

accessible?Here is where investigative journalism begins to operate. The Oxford dictionary defines

investigativeas following:

Carry out a systematic or formal inquiry to discover and examine the facts of

(an incident, allegation, etc.) so as to establish the truth:

If investigating means to discovering the facts to establish the truth, does that mean that routine

journalism is not doing that? Of course not. Unfortunately it is hard to define the difference by what

the two types are doing, it is more about how much effort and time they put in to do so: According

to Editor in chief of the Guardian, Alan Rusbridger all journalism is investigative to a greater orlesser extent, but investigative journalism - though it is a bit of a tautology- is that because it

requires more, its where the investigative element ismore pronounced. (De Burg 2008, pp. 17) The

border between routine and investigative journalism is vague. Journalist Jonathan Calvert explains

that trenchantly: Some stories you make five calls on, some twenty. When you are making a

hundred, thats investigative journalism. A journalist recognises to become investigative whenyou

realise people are lying to you *+, then you have to find different ways of getting hold of the

information and it can take longer. In fact, investigative journalism is leaking injustices, which also

means an allegation against someone or a group. As a serious medium you have to be very careful,

because in allegations against people evidence really matters. (De Burg 2008, pp. 17)

Can routine journalism be investigative?

Yes, of course. And it should be. Carl Bernstein, who revealed the famous Watergate in 1972, has

repeatedly said that all good reporting is investigative. (Shepard 2012) Every journalist is seeking to

find out the truth of a story. According to the Elements of Journalism(Kovach and Rosenstiel 2001,

pp. 10) their first obligation is to tell the truth. In daily journalism there is often not enough time

for being absolutely sure. The only thing journalists can do is to show both sides of a story; being

balanced and objective in their method. But in fact, they cannot prove if it is true or not. That does

not have to be a bad thing, because society also needs daily information and journalism, not only

investigators. Often that is about information nobody wants or cannot hide, like facts that Mandela

died on the 5ht of December 2013. We also need to understand that journalism can fulfil important

tasks even though it is not giving answers.


4/5

Example 1: Answering a question by not

answering a question

BBC newsnight Anchor-man Jeremy Packman is famous

because of his interviews. Most controversial was hisinterview of Michael Howard whom he asked

unbelievably 16 times (!) the same question: Did you

threaten to overrule him? Howard did not answer the

simple yes or no question, which does not mean the audience did not gain knowledge trough this

interview. It saw a man preferring not to answer an easy question, but trying to escape from the

probably inconvenient situation. Daily journalism (the newsnight is shown every weekday) did in this

case not investigate something by giving answers, but it gave the viewer a deeper insight. Howard

was not willing to tell the truth, so longer and deeper investigative research would have to be done

to find out.

Example 2: When breaking the law is the only wayAre journalists allowed to break the law? To film and record sneaky?Yes, they are in some aspects.

Namely if it is the only way to find out the truth, which is in the public interest. The German

investigative journalist Gnter Wallraff for example broke the law when he wrote his bestseller lead

story(Der Aufmacher) in 1970. He worked for the BILD-Zeitung (similar to the Sun in England) in

Germany to find out how they work. He revealed that the paper is lying and making stories up

regularly. He not only cheated the BILD, but also broke their company and desk secret. As a result

BILD sued him and they fought in court over several years. This example shows that investigating

something is only possible in illegal ways. That BILD is making up stories is clearly in the public

interest, but Wallraff was only to prove it by working there and revealing how they work.

You can say that investigative journalists are putting the ideal truth about all others even the law.

There are various, famous and historical example, but I want to mention a recent one. Edward

Snowden, a former NSA employee, (plus the Guardian and the Washington Post) revealed how the

US National Security Agency is spying out nearly every one of us. Snowden is therefor accuseda bit

ironicallyfor spying and has to defend himself in court, if he would be present in the USA. What

Snowden and his journalistic helpmates did was highly investigative, that shows especially Edward

Snowden in his public letter, in which he says: Speaking the truth is not a crime. (Snowden 2013)


5/5

Conclusion and the difference of investigative and daily journalism

Although the border between investigative and routine journalism is vague, this essay showed two

major differences. Firstly, it is the time and effort they spend on a topic. Secret information is not

unreasonable secret; it is because somebody wants to hide it from the public. Revealing it needstime, skills, and courage in order to not assault someone falsely. That can last for days, weeks but

also for months or even years until you find out the truth. Routine journalists are depending on

deadlines; therefore they cannot afford weeklong research.

The second difference this essay explored was the risk journalists are willing to go. Investigative

journalists are not only watchdogs, but also the ones who fight for the truth, which of course is not

pleasing everyone. They are taking risks to serve the public interest in truly information. Therefor

the can get accused, imprisoned or even killed. According to the yearly report of Reporters without

Borders66 journalists got killed and 189 got imprisoned in 2013. (Reporters without Borders 2013)

In my view both - investigative and daily journalism - are important for society. Journalists are

providing information, which are in the public interest. The difference between investigative and

routine journalists is only how much time and risk can or will I afford to find out the truth.

1519 words.

Bibliography

Harding, J. (2013) James Harding speech to staff in BBC News and Current Affairs on 4

December 2013. London: BBC. Online:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/speeches/2013/james-harding.html

Kovach, B. and Rosenstiel, T. (2001) Journalisms first obligation is to tell the truth,

Elements of Journalism, 55:2, pp. 10

Oxford Dictionaries (2013) Definition of investigate.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/investigate?q=investigate

Reporters without Borders (2013) Press freedom barometer 2013.http://en.rsf.org/press-

freedom-barometer-journalists-killed.html?annee=2013

Shepard, A. (2012) Investigative Reporting Is Now Endangered. New York: The New York

Times. Online:http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/06/13/did-any-good-come-

of-watergate/the-journalism-watergate-inspired-is-endangered-now

Snowden, E. (2013) Speaking the truth is not a crime. London: The Guardian. Online:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/01/nsa-files-edward-snowdens-letter-to-

angela-merkel-live-coverage
http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/speeches/2013/james-harding.htmlhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/speeches/2013/james-harding.htmlhttp://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/investigate?q=investigatehttp://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/investigate?q=investigatehttp://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-barometer-journalists-killed.html?annee=2013http://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-barometer-journalists-killed.html?annee=2013http://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-barometer-journalists-killed.html?annee=2013http://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-barometer-journalists-killed.html?annee=2013http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/06/13/did-any-good-come-of-watergate/the-journalism-watergate-inspired-is-endangered-nowhttp://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/06/13/did-any-good-come-of-watergate/the-journalism-watergate-inspired-is-endangered-nowhttp://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/06/13/did-any-good-come-of-watergate/the-journalism-watergate-inspired-is-endangered-nowhttp://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/06/13/did-any-good-come-of-watergate/the-journalism-watergate-inspired-is-endangered-nowhttp://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/01/nsa-files-edward-snowdens-letter-to-angela-merkel-live-coveragehttp://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/01/nsa-files-edward-snowdens-letter-to-angela-merkel-live-coveragehttp://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/01/nsa-files-edward-snowdens-letter-to-angela-merkel-live-coveragehttp://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/01/nsa-files-edward-snowdens-letter-to-angela-merkel-live-coveragehttp://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/01/nsa-files-edward-snowdens-letter-to-angela-merkel-live-coveragehttp://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/06/13/did-any-good-come-of-watergate/the-journalism-watergate-inspired-is-endangered-nowhttp://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/06/13/did-any-good-come-of-watergate/the-journalism-watergate-inspired-is-endangered-nowhttp://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-barometer-journalists-killed.html?annee=2013http://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-barometer-journalists-killed.html?annee=2013http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/investigate?q=investigatehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/speeches/2013/james-harding.html

The Difference Between Investigative Journalism and Routine Journalism

Documents

Transcript of The Difference Between Investigative Journalism and Routine Journalism