When I first heard the words ‘investigative journalism’, I automatically
thought of the television show ‘Castle’. You know the one, where the main
character is an author and he follows around a detective to get awesome
stories. After the lecture I realised that I had no idea what was going on.
Investigative journalism wasn’t about following around crime and putting yourself
in dangerous situations to get awesome stories, it was about getting the
correct facts for a story. It was about making sure the truth gets out there so
the public knows what was going on.
The lecture demonstrated that there are three investigative
methods that journalists use to check their story is right. Firstly there is
interviewing. This is interviewing numerous on-record sources, as well as anonymous
sources, to determine if all the information matches up and to hear different
accounts of the same story. Secondly, there is observation. This involves investigating
technical issues, the examination of government and business practices and what
effect this has, as well as research into social and legal issues. Thirdly,
analysing documents is vital for validating a story. Looking at law suits,
legal documents, freedom of information material and so on usually present the
clear hard facts without variation.
After investigating all of these, you then have to ask “Does
what you were told, what you saw and what was recorded line up?”
Sure it’s no ‘Castle’ investigation, but hearing about this
made me realise the significance of having to correct facts, and a combination
of these methods would definitely improve the credibility of you as the author.
No comments:
Post a Comment