Tips from Bob Woodward on Investigative Journalism

Bob Woodward examines the persisting question plaguing journalists - "Where do we get our information?"
He narrows it down to three places, but explains that they cannot be looked at simply as they are.

1. People - but you must look beyond simply one person in order to gain multiple voices and perspectives to add depth to the story.

2. Documents - again must be utilised to add more depth and authority to a story than simply relying on people.

3. Fact Checking - which he highlights with an anecdote from his time as a journalist that shows the great importance of checking the facts yourself rather than solely relying on what is given to you, as this is a dangerous practice and can lead to severe issues if information is incorrect. Another side of the journalist actually going out to check the facts themselves is that they will then be able to get a greater feel and understanding for the story than they may have had before.

iW VIDEO | Is Modern Journalism About Truth?

Within this video Arianna Huffington raises a positive of the move to online media that is one not commonly brought up when dealing with the new media. She views that online news forms greater advocate for honesty in journalism due to the updating, correcting and disproving of untrue information in a constant manner. As we expect news 24/7 Huffington assumes that this will mean further examination of topics, and thus we are more likely to gain the truth and journalists will therefore become more accountable for the work they produce.

She also notes that it is valuable as we now have a wider number of sources available to us, a factor of new media that is valuable for both consumers and journalists.

Christopher Buckley also briefly brings up mindframe that younger generations are in when it concerns the media, talking about his 16 year old son who has developed a suspicion of media and a type of perception that when he was that age would never have thought twice about. This shows that generations now are going to come into media consumption with differing views and ideals, and also with a lot more experience of new media, and this must be noted by journalists to ensure they are able to meet their audiences.

The Legal Minefield

Journalism law, and the concepts of rights, responsibilities and the public interest which will all impact upon the effects and interpretation of law, are interesting to examine within the context of journalism. This was shown particularly in this week's seminar presentations that journalism is a largely self regulated industry, which means a lot of power is placed in the hands of journalists to employ their own ethics to decision making, yet there is still legal recourse for many aspects of this complex industry.

Tapsall and Varley state that within journalism law it is more a question of approach then content.

An area that particularly strikes me is defamation law, privacy and the public interest, and how these three intertwine. It is clear that a journalist must be incredibly careful with what they report, especially ensuring accuracy, as defamation can be viewed as a serious offence. On the other hand it is also difficult to find that line especially due to the rise of new media and the increase in celebrity news.

Something interesting that I found however, was an article in The Courier Mail that notes defamation cases are on the rise due to social media. Australian Defamation Lawyers principal, Barrie Goldsmith, said that "It is no longer something pursued solely by celebrities and big companies. Individuals and smaller community-based cases form over half our workload."

Has the world of social media enhanced the concept of defamation, or will it damage them and make it more trivial? Especially as this can occur do to content published on online blogs, a realm where people view themselves as publishers and perhaps even journalists, thus having an impact on the field.

Truth and Objectivity

"Respect for truth and the public's right to information are fundamental principles of journalism."  

MEAA Code of Ethics

The world journalist's inhabit can at times be difficult to navigate in order to best tell the truth to their publics. Sharon Tickle notes in her contribution to Journalism: Theory in Practice (Tapsall & Varley, 2008) that the world is shaped by time pressures, market forces, law, work culture and practices, human frailty and journalist's experiences. Truth is a vital aspect of journalism that they must learn how to portray and the best methods of doing this appropriately.

"For information to make sense, the audience must have some faith that what it is presented with has some basis in reality." 

 (Tickle, 2008, p.91)

It is clear that what the truth is will differ due to the form, those who present the information, how it has been framed and packaged, even down to the way in which it is interpreted by the audience and the experience they bring. Truth at times can be a subjective thing, and because of this journalist's must be wary that what they report is accurate.

Tickle introduces the conflict between truth and the new media as an example of the difficulty of portraying truth and objectivity in media, and this is an interesting concept within new media. It has been noted that truth is potentially more difficult to portray in new media, or even that it has a less important role within this field. Those within new media have rejected these claims that they are unable to present the truth, yet cultural theorists have created the view that new media's attempts are futile due to the fact that truth is situational and subjective.

Is this a factor, will truth differ and potentially waver across different forms of media? And how is truth presented?

Uncompromising Journalism vs Acts of Crass Insensitivity

In the textbook reading this week, I was most struck by the introduction about the shooting of police officers in 1998 and the coverage that the Age newspaper ran on it, including a photograph in which the bodies were clearly seen.

Editor at the time Michael Gawenda responded to publishing this photograph by saying:

"What happened was confronting and shocking. I think this reinforced in peple's minds the horror of what happened. If I had the choice again, I'd publish that photograph."

(Weekend Australian, 1998, p.29)

This situation was reminiscent of the shooting of two brothers in Mayfield this year. The Daily Telegraph's first story that they ran about the shooting showed a photograph in which you could clearly see the bodies of the slain brothers on the footpath. I remember being incredibly shocked to see that image, especially as I had been in the area a short time after the shooting and had seen how carefully the area had been concealed by police to hide the grim scene from the public. 

Within a matter of hours the photograph had been removed and replaced with one that was much less obvious, but the initial photograph had highlighted the way in which there is a duplicitous nature between public interest and private lives. While it was an event I had developed an interest in due to being in the area at the time of the shooting and it happening near where I live, it was still such a shock to see such a graphic image and something that I am unsure that I wanted to see. 

It also highlights the concept of whether things such as this are uncompromosing journalism, or rather acts of crass insensitivity, as worded within the textbook. I see this as being particularly relevant when it comes to reporting on crimes and accidents, especially as the public do see these things as greatly in their interest as it will have an effect on their sense of safety and may impact upon their lives, but then on the other hand those who are actually closely connected to the crime or accidents, such as family and friends of victims may not want graphic details of the death of their loved one to be portrayed within the media.

Ian Richards, in his contribution to Journalism: Theory in Practice (Tapsall & Varley, 2008), he examines the potential reasoning behind news reports such as this, stating:

" It could be seen as an increasingly common form of media behaviour that is, at best, confronting to many readers and, at worst, disturbing to others, especially children."

(2008, p.187)

It is a fine line that journalists must tread upon sensitivelywhen they are reporting such sensitive and horrific matters, especially due to the ambiguous lines that divide what is public interest and what is invading someones private life.

Can Celebrities Have a Private Life?

In the world of modern journalism, can celebrities have any semblence of a private life that we all take for granted in our day to day lives?

With the rise of new media and the online realm, all of which are constantly needing to be updated, they now need more and more content to entertain the audiences. New media is also often acknowledged as containing 'trashier' news than it's print and broadcast counterparts, and having built a reputation that includes this concept and also offering a way for people to consume their entertainment news in an interactive, multimedia format, the further rise of this type of news is inevitable.
The impact of this for celebrities is that they will become a greater target, and for a wider variety of reasons, and in a particularly image driven world of the internet, any picture will do.

Website TMZ is solely devoted to entertainment news, and has built a strong following through the use of both online and traditional methods. They have a reputation as an entertainment news provider that will use any footage of a celebrity they can gain. Clips can be seen in which the reporters simply wait outside their homes or restaurants just to catch a grab of the celebrity, it does not have to be anything of great substance.
So is this fair and is this news?

One school of thought is that they have put themselves into the public eye, and must live with the effects of this lifestyle choice including the paparazzi and lack of privacy.

Another thought is that it should only be shown if it is actually in the publics interest. This is a duplicitous concept however, as who will decide what is in the public interest? Some people may find entertainment news to be genuinely interesting and would see that it is in their interest, whereas others view that it is rather simply something they are interested in and not actually in the publics interest.

In the blog Ethical Martini it explores the concept of whether celebrity gossip is actually news and newsworthy, and if it is in any way in the publics interest to receive this information.

Celebrity gossip is an interesting facet of news due to both the keen interest that the public take in this style of news, and also the way in which journalists go about gaining their news and how they will constantly toy the line of what is ethical, what is invading privacy, and always being sure to find the difference between fact and potential defamation.

Ian Richard, in his contribution to Journalism: Theory in Practice (Tapsall & Varley, 2008), has a positive view of the future of this type of media and the issue of invasion of privacy, stating:

"While the constant publication of information gained by journalists who have intruded into someone's privacy sometimes seems never ending, there are at least grounds for the hope that the tide will eventually be turned. or, if not turned, at least prevented from washing all before it." (p.196)

Personally this view seems a bit idealistic as with the building prominence of the internet seems to have only caused growth in entertainment news.

The Online Realm

For my presentation week the way in which journalists have come to adapt to new media and taken it on board was examined. My part of this was looking specifically at online news and how journalists have taken on this online realm.

It has become clear that the move to online is inevitable, and that journalists must now break out of their traditional reporting methods to adapt to the multimedia style of reporting that online offers. As Susan Tapsall bluntly states "those who fail to accept, adopt and implement the technological advances to them - such as new converged electronic forms of news gathering and publication - are viewed as luddites, attempting to stand in the path of progress." (p. 241, 2008)

While majority of newspapers have embraced it and are now successfully transferring their news to the internet, they must be aware that it is not a simple transfer of information that will allow a successful take on the online realm. As Mark Ingram from Gigaom notes that "the reality is that most newspapers simply don't appreciate how different the online world is when it comes to content. Too many are still labouring under the misapprehension that the Web is just like print,except without all the tree killing - you put your content on there just like it was in the paper version (except maybe you add a link or two, or a video clip) and readers line up to read it, and you go home."

It is more than a transfer to the internet, and in order to be successful newspapers must embrace this, especially in an attempt to offer readers what they want while attempting to maintain quality journalism.

My eyes were also opened up to WikiLeaks which I previously did not have much knowledge on. And as it became clear in the discussion following the presentation that it was an area that intrigued much of the class. I believe that it raises some really interesting ethical and legal questions in the way it gains classified information from within these groups and organisations. On one hand it is clever the way in which they have set it up to be able to gain this information and then hand it on to journalists to put it greater in the public eye, without getting in trouble legally, especially as a member of the public that insight is able to be given into such secretive issues that may impact upon their lives. It is also something that should be handled carefully, and while it may be a great stepping stone for journalists they still will have to complete a lot of their own work to verify all the information given to them, and also sift through it in order to find the information suitable for their news outlet.