The head of IRE — Investigative Reporters and Editors — says the nation’s newsrooms need to shore up their efforts to produce enterprise journalism on quicker turnarounds.
“The amount of solid, investigative journalism at the local level by newspapers is seriously underestimated,” says Brant Houston, the 46 year-old executive director of IRE. “Where we fall short is in the in-depth, day-to-day coverage where staff cuts and slashed budgets have really hurt.”
Houston also said he believes investigative journalism has waned in many local broadcast newsrooms, despite strong efforts at stations in Houston, Dallas, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Minneapolis and San Francisco, among others.
It began back in 1975 with the intent of creating a networking tool and a forum in which a handful of journalists from across the country could raise questions and exchange ideas.
Today, Investigative Reporters and Editors has an international membership of more than 4,400 and conducts seminars and training conferences all over the world.
Recently, IRE’s National Institute for Computer Assisted Reporting held a week-long “boot camp” for journalists at Poynter, teaching journalists how investigative reporting can be enhanced by the use of spreadsheet and data base analysis. Houston, says investigative reporting, despite some setbacks in recent years, plays a critical role in quality journalism.
An edited transcript of Houston’s interview follows:
Q: As you travel about the country interacting with journalists and editors, what’s your assessment on the state of investigative reporting?
A: Despite reports to the contrary, investigative reporting is alive and kicking. There is little doubt that journalists are colliding with more frequent efforts to soften a story or coverage and undergoing more aggressive legal attacks on newsgathering. But it looks as if the well-founded investigative story prevails more often than not. Realistically, these stories have never been easy to do. By their very nature, good investigative stories require hard work and thick skins. And they generally make a lot of people cranky and uncomfortable — both inside and outside the news organization.
Q: How about broadcast? It used to be that every local TV station in the country had an “I-Team.” How well are local stations doing investigative journalism?
A: I think these efforts go in cycles. At the local level, we seem to be at the low end of this cycle. While the network magazine shows put out regular enterprise and investigative pieces, many broadcast journalists who want to do serious local investigative reporting are pretty depressed about the state of the profession. That being said, there are stations still digging into good stories. KHOU in Houston has gotten a lot of recognition for its work on the Firestone tire stories. WFAA in Dallas has been doing investigations. Stations in Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Minneapolis, and San Francisco come to mind right away — and I’m leaving quite a few stations and cities out — as spots from where we’ve consistently seen good pieces. Yet, there is deep concern about the overall commitment by the broadcast industry to local investigative stories.
Q: How well are newspapers and magazines doing? Is the commitment level still strong?
A: Some of the larger magazines have shown a new commitment to the well-documented, non-tabloid investigative piece. At the same time, I wish some of the work by newsletters got more play and recognition. Some of the best groundbreaking work is being done there.
I think the amount of solid, investigative journalism at the local level by newspapers is seriously underestimated. Each year in the IRE contest entries, we see impressive work from papers throughout the country. Those papers’ work may not get noticed during the year because they are not in New York City or Washington D.C., but they are doing good watchdog stories. Where we fall short is in the in-depth day-to-day coverage where staff cuts and slashed budgets have really hurt. Despite all the uncertainty about where journalism is going, there is still great passion about the profession and desire to do investigative reporting by many journalists at the small to medium size papers.
Q: We have seen a lot of traditional journalists move to online publications. How is investigative reporting faring on the ‘Net?
A: Last year, the future looked fantastic. The move of traditional journalists to online held a lot of promise. The move raised the standards and credibility of the reporting. At the same time, the environment was a bit more open, so the stories were less predictable and pushed the boundaries, mostly in responsible ways. But when the venture capital dried up, the resources were cut back, if not obliterated. APBNews.com, which concentrated on crime and was doing exciting investigative work, nearly disappeared. Now it’s back in a smaller form.
There has been a setback, but I think it’s temporary. The web will end up offering a place for investigative stories and will push the traditional journalism companies — as alternative papers and business weeklies did in the past — to do better work and recognize topics and people who have not been covered.
Q: How well have journalists embraced technology, in particular, computer-assisted reporting?
A: Journalists as a group are a conservative gang when it comes to change. We also have less time than ever to learn new techniques and, of course, we’re easily frustrated. The use of computer-assisted reporting has taken time, but its techniques are now accepted as necessary and valuable journalism and its use is spreading throughout every newsroom. Once journalists see how CAR can help them come up with better and more imaginative stories on their beat and that those stories have added depth and context, and thus more credibility, they embrace it.
Q: What are the biggest newsroom obstacles that investigative journalists need to overcome?
A: The first is making ourselves find the time to do it. We will never have all the resources or support we think we need. These days it’s crucial that journalists realize that managing their own time and work is a first step. Second, news organizations are more cautious and worried than ever about advertisers, legal threats, and reader and viewer response. That means an investigative journalist generally has to be more convincing with management on why it’s legitimate and important to pursue a story.
If after finding the time and making the convincing argument, the journalist doesn’t feel they can get the investigative story done, they may have to consider moving on to a place where they’ll get at least the minimal support they need. The good news is that journalist, and most of all, the public, appreciate a strong investigative story.
Q: What lessons have we learned in the quarter-century history of Investigative Reporters and Editors?
A: We’ve learned that most of our principles, standards, and techniques are still valid. We know we must have the ability to maintain our passion for the work and our care for the poor and powerless. We also recognize the need to document the evidence, to push ourselves to find new sources and resources, to strive to learn new techniques, to be fair and to do line-by-line and word-byword accuracy checks, and to share knowledge and skills. These ideas are all still standing.
We’ve learned that the skills we’ve developed work not only for long projects but for daily and beat stories. We have also learned that the existence and work of Investigative Reporters and Editors has become even more important for our profession in an era of uncertainty and doubt. We realize we need to continue to provide a haven for those who believe in this kind of work and want to learn how to do it better.
