You?ve got a box describing differences between conventional (traditional) and investigative journalism. Seven lines from 14 given are deliberately mixed up. Find the wrong lines, and prove why they must be replaced.
Conventional Journalism
Investigative Journalism
Research
1. Information is gathered and reported at a fixed rhythm (daily, weekly, monthly)
1. Information cannot be published until its coherence and completeness are assured
2. Research continues until the story is confirmed, and may continue after it is published
2. Research is completed swiftly. No further research is done once a story is completed
3. The story is based on the obtainable maximum of information, and can be very long
3. The story is based on a necessary minimum of information and can be very short
4. The declarations of sources can substitute for documentation
4. The reportage requires documentation to support or deny the declarations of sources
Source relations
5. The good faith of sources cannot be presumed; any source may provide false information; no information may be used without verification
5. The good faith of sources is presumed, often without verification
6. Official information is hidden from the reporter, because its revelation may compromise the interests of authorities or institutions
6. Official sources offer information to the reporter freely, to promote themselves and their goals
7. The reporter must accept the official version of a story, though he or she may contrast it to
commentaries and statements from other sources
7. The reporter may explicitly challenge or deny the official version of a story, based on information from independent sources
8. The reporter disposes of less information than most or all of his sources
8. The reporter disposes of more information than any one of his sources taken individually, and of more information than most of them taken together
9. Sources often cannot be identified for the sake of their security
9. Sources are nearly always identified
Outcomes
10. Reportage is seen as a reflection of the world, which is accepted as it is. The reporter does not hope for results beyond informing the public
10. The reporter refuses to accept the world as it is. The story is aimed at penetrating or exposing a given situation, in order to reform it, denounce it or, in certain cases, promote an example of a better way
11. Without a personal engagement from the reporter, the story will never be completed
11. The reportage does not require a personal
engagement from the reporter
12. The reporter seeks to be objective, without bias or judgement toward any of the parties in the story
12. The reporter seeks to be fair and scrupulous toward the facts of the story, and on that basis may designate its victims, heroes and wrongdoers. The reporter may also offer a judgment or verdict on the story
13. The dramatic structure of the reportage is not of great importance. The story does not have an end, because the news is continuous
13. The dramatic structure of the story is essential to its impact, and leads to a conclusion that is offered by the reporter or a source
14. Errors expose the reporter to formal and informal sanctions, and can destroy the credibility of the reporter and the media
14. Errors may be committed by the reporter, but they are inevitable and usually without importance
From Mark Lee Hunter?s Story-Based Inquiry: A manual for investigative journalists
Wrong lines are: ____________________
Focus on a topic:
1. Do you agree that all the statements are appropriate for conventional and investigative journalism? Which points don?t you agree with?
2. How do you think ? should the requirements for conventional journalism be lighter than for investigative one? Justify your point of view.
3. What statement from the list would you mark as the most meaningful? Explain why.
4. What does the author mean under the phrase ?the credibility of the reporter and the media?. What does it depend on? What can destroy it?
Vocabulary work
Write Russian equivalents to the following words:
obtainable
good faith of sources
verification
bias
explicitly
to dispose
to presume
personal engagement
to denounce
revelation
Investigative journalism should never be confused with leak journalism ?quick-hit scoops gained by the leaking of documents or tips, typically by those in political power. Indeed, in emerging democracies, the definition can be rather vague, and stories are often labeled investigative reporting simply if they are critical or involve leaked records. Stories that focus on crime or corruption, analysis, or even outright opinion pieces may similarly be mislabeled as investigative reporting (Global Investigative Journalism Network).
Aleak itself is defined be Cambridge Dictionary as ?the origin of secret information that becomes known, or the act of making it known?. And leak journalism based on ?unauthorized (especially deliberate) disclosure of confidential information? (Free Dictionary) can?t be called investigative journalism in its original meaning.
An investigative journalist has a popular synonym muckraker ? a person who intentionally seeks out and publishes the misdeeds, such as criminal acts or corruption, of a public individual for profit or gain. Sometimes this information is linked to powerful businessmen. Muckraker is often applied specifically to journalists (Business Dictionary). As investigative journalism isn?t the same as news leak, a muckraker doesn?t equal to a leakor a whistleblower- one who reveals wrongdoing within an organization to the public or to those in positions of authority (Free Dictionary).
