Below is an essay I submitted to David Leigh’s Investigative Journalism class.
The biggest factor influencing the effectiveness of investigative journalism is the state and the laws within which it is being practiced. The effectiveness of journalism is often defined within the paradigm of “states”. Reporters Without Borders maintains the press freedom index, which ranks states according to their record of press freedom. Even in conversation the importance of the state in influencing journalism is repeated: we’ve all heard the stereotype that the British press (with its tabloid newspapers) scrutinises the behaviour and actions of politicians more effectively than the American press.
I believe that direct and indirect influence from the state system in which journalism is conducted is one of the biggest hindrances to the furthering of universal principles of investigative journalism, and that investigative journalism is most potent when it bypasses or overrides this influence. What should be desired is an international attitude to investigative journalism, based in the principles of international human rights law, and international cooperation. The international system of states is the biggest roadblock to this aim.
It’s useful to start with a country with one of the most powerful states in the modern world: China. Until relatively recently the Chinese state could have been said to have encouraged investigative journalism. Over the last 30 years, loosened party control of the media and new media outlets have firmly established investigative journalism practices within mainstream media. In the past party officials encouraged investigative journalists willing to spend time in digging out corruption. “These new journalistic developments were not in opposition to the party: on the contrary, the party leadership encouraged and supported many of them.” Continue Reading »
