Investigative journalism

The third way in which media fights corruption is by conducting its own investigations into corrupt practices. This form of reporting has come to be popularly known as investigative reporting. The US Center for Investigative Reporting defines Investigative reports as;

“Hard stories, hard to assemble and hard to tell. It involves numerous interviews to sort through leads, establish connections and collaborate sources, followed by writing and re-writing to bring clarity to complex issues.”²³

de Burgh (2000:9) argues that investigative journalism is an act by a professional journalist of discovering the truth and identifying lapses in a given matter of public interest. From an ethical point of view de Burgh (2000) says that the act of doing investigative journalism is distinct from apparently similar work done by police, lawyers, auditors and regulatory bodies in that it is not limited as to target, not legally founded and closely connected to publicity.

Macdonell (2003) argues that investigative journalism informs the public about a hidden yet important issue. It is a work of an enterprising reporter who pieces together a remarkable story from a variety of sources. Not only is it published on the front page of

23 The media and curbing corruption, March 18 to May 27 2003 workshop Module for journalists in developing countries organized by the World Bank Institute

the newspaper or broadcast on radio and TV but, more important, this story contradicts and corrects the government’s official version of reality. However in order to produce an investigative report, one must obtain public records and other forms of public information. Access to this knowledge base is critical to prove and convincingly demonstrate that the contentions and allegations in the report are supported by facts and reasonable inferences gleaned from concrete evidence, usually documents.

Investigative expert William Gaines in his book Investigative Reporting for print and broadcast (cited in Macdonell, 2003) says documents are like the bricks needed to build a wall and interviews are the mortar that holds the bricks together and keeps the wall intact. If there are no bricks, there is no story – nothing for the cement to join. By launching painstaking investigations into acts of corruption, the media takes a pro-active method to combat corruption. This form of reporting is preferred if compared to reactive reporting because it gives other anti-corruption agencies leads that can be pursued to make deep investigations into acts of corruption.

Going by the definition of the US Center for Investigative Reporting, we understand that investigative journalism requires hard work and high ethical standards on the part of the journalist. These two aspects are sometimes lacking in many stories perceived to be investigative by most African journalists. Rønning (2007) argues that investigative journalism is not based on gossip and rumours. He says that many stories considered to belong to investigative journalism in Africa do not adhere to proper standards.

Much of what is presented as investigative journalism in Africa is based on poorly sourced material, often only one source, which has not been properly checked.

Good and thorough research is frequently lacking. Questions such as why was this story leaked to me are not being asked, nor in whose interest is it that this story is being published. […] Journalism about corruption should not have as its main and only focus to expose the personal lives of individuals. It should focus on the wider issues of systematic abuse of power and on how corrupt practices prevent development. Rønning (2007:15).

In regard to ethics, there is often conflict of interest that relate to media bureaucracies and the social structure. Sometimes, media owners are accused of being involved in some forms of corruption especially in their other businesses or their relationship with the state. For the media to successfully combat corruption, they need to overcome the institutional constraints that often result into corruption within the media itself. A key component of this conflict of interest is the relationship between journalists and sources.

The close association between the reporters and the ones reported about sometimes compromises the media and encourages corruption to breed within the very institution that is supposed to be combating it.

Officials, politicians and journalists, not only in Africa, but also elsewhere, often belong to the same circles, meet at receptions and drink at the same clubs.

Corruption is not only a phenomenon to be covered by the press, and something that exists merely in the world outside the newsroom, it is also to be found inside the media, both in the way that media organisations are structured and in how journalists behave. In many media systems there exist a grace-and favour mentality that while not necessarily in it self corrupt, contributes to a view of the media as not being objective and above undue influence. (Rønning, 2007: 16) In Uganda, like elsewhere in Africa, journalists are poorly paid. This puts them at a risk of being compromised. I am not particularly suggesting that poorly paid people are necessarily corrupt. The main problem is that entrusting a poorly paid journalist to report on officials who have huge sums of money accumulated from corruption is not a wise idea. Many of these individuals may bribe the journalists with “brown envelopes²⁴” in exchange for covering up damaging stories, writing positive stories about some individuals or organizations or extorting money by otherwise threatening blackmail.

24 These are envelopes given to journalists and editors containing money for positive coverage or killing stories