Lowell Bergmann is a ground breaking investigative reporter, a producer/correspondent for the PBS documentary series "Frontline" in the US and spent 14 years as a producer with CBS's "60 Minutes".
Bergman shared a Pulitzer Prize for Public Service with The New York Times in 2004 for "A Dangerous Business," (which detailed a record of egregious worker safety violations coupled with the systematic violation of environmental laws in the iron sewer and water pipe industry) and is a Professor at the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism. Furthermore, he is a co-founder of the Centre for Investigative Journalism and a consultant at ProPublica, an independent, non-profit newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest.
The story of Bergman's investigation of the tobacco industry for 60 Minutes was chronicled in the 1999 Academy Award-nominated feature film "The Insider", in which Bergman was portrayed by Al Pacino (below left).
The Editors Weblog contacted Lowell Bergman - who was an early adopter and advocate of the multimedia model - to discover his views on the key issues facing investigative reporting and its future.
EW: What do you see in the future for investigative journalism? Do you still see it as having a home at newspapers?
LB: Investigative journalism in America has always been done by magazines and in books as well as in newspaper. For many years newspapers were not doing much of it. It was a 'freelance' occupation usually with writers like I.F. Stone and others who left newspapers because they were too restrictive. Personally, I have been using the web and been 'online' for more than a decade.
But it remains true that it is newspapers and traditional news organizations that produce almost all the new information everyday.
Pure web based operations with a few new exceptions recycle information they get from those organizations. We will see web based sites becoming the providers of more and more news and quality information in the future, but the transition will take time.
EB: What do you see as the key issue facing your profession?
LB: I am not sure it is a 'profession' in the traditional sense. In this country it is open to everyone. It is not licensed. Right now the transformation of the media endangers the collective experience of news people who chose to make gathering, investigating and presenting quality information their life work. That is why non-profits and educational institutions [Universities] will become more and more important. They do not have the same pressures. Its a time of transition, a kind of "Middle Age", that will not see a resurgence of real reporting until the economic questions are resolved.
EW: How has new media changed the way you work?
LB: Obviously, the availability of databases, newspaper archives and all sorts of information on the Web makes many things easier. But the old techniques and standards have not been replaced. To do investigative or in depth reporting you have take the time to meet people, and not meet them in a chat room.
Confidentiality on the internet is virtually impossible. It depends on trust. And trust is the weakest link in terms of the reliability of information offered up on the Web by so called 'new media'.
EW: Do you think there is more pressure from editors with the advent of the 24-hour news culture? Are investigative journalists getting the time and resources necessary?
LB: At a certain point you are a stenographer, if you don't have enough time to do the kind of reporting that advances what we know. This is not just true of 'investigative' reporters.
All good reporting involves asking some skeptical questions and not assuming what you are told is true. When I think of 'investigative reporting' I mean reporting in the public interest that looks deeply into a subject or story. Often it involves developing sources or hunting for documents or both and having the time to explore what they mean. At the same time in the best of all world's your editor is happy if you come back and say there is no story, or the story you originally went in pursuit of changed.
So, in answer to your question the pressure of a failing economic model by definition means there is less time. Prior to the decline of newspapers, broadcasters in the U.S. freed from the strictures around licensing that once forced them to present programming in the public interest along with operating with the threat of punishment created worldwide news gathering organizations. They had the incentive to do documentaries and present them even if the ratings were far below those of entertainment. That is no longer the case so you have less in depth reporting on the air as well.
EW: Is the law now having an impact on your profession? Is the law becoming more restrictive for journalists in general, and investigative journalists in particular?
LB: Not really. There has been a squeeze on the confidential source privilege, but it appears that Congress and a new President will sign a federal 'shield law'. The issues surrounding what is called national security reporting and/or criminal cases where a prosecutor or defendant has no where else to turn for information are unlikely to be resolved by the legislation. It is more of a question of the attitude/discretion of the prosecutors.
EW: Do you feel protected by the law?
LB: I never expect 'protection'. My sources do.
EW: How do you think an editor should best manage an investigative reporting team or reporter?
LB: Briefly, they should provide insight, encouragement and support, especially when the going gets tough.
EW: Who are the main competition to newspaper investigative reporters now? What are your thoughts on groups such as ProPublica?
This work is non profit. I have even called it 'anti-profit' by its very nature. So ProPublica, I am a consultant, or the Center for Investigative Reporting, I am one of the founders, are non profits working the public interest. Basically, that is what a very good newspaper newsroom does: report stories without fear or favor, and without considering the resources needed to do that. It is at its root a non-profit activity.
The Palestinian-Israeli media's objectivity and editorial quality is questioned and discussed in an article by YNet News. Ruham Nimri, the coordinator of the media-monitoring sector at Palestine's Miftah organization, goes as far as to state that Arabic-language newspapers based outside the Middle East may be more reliable.
Since media outlets may have difficulties in being properly informed, news may be created. Competition may drive some media to have reporting that is "sensational", "tabloid" and "entertainment-oriented", according to Yizhar Be'er, executive director of the Keshev Center for the Protection of Democracy in Israel.
"The problem with the Palestinian media is that they don't have their own reporting. What you read in the Palestinian papers is news taken from Israeli sources and international agencies, so there's nothing much new when you read a Palestinian newspaper," said Nimri.
Palestinian media may be affected by political opinions and have less independence, according to Be'er.
Meanwhile, Israeli media is "more professional", free and "more pluralistic", Be'er pointed out. The problem with Israeli reporting is that stories may be edited to the point that the final content differs vastly from the initial report journalists provided.
"We see the editors frame the reports in a way that highlights the responsibility of the Palestinians and downplays the Israeli responsibility. The main narrative is that the other side is to blame for the situation we're in," Be'er said.
Back in 2001, the Guardian newspaper asked, "Where have all the women gone?", and it is a question that has plagued the editors of leading British newspapers for the past two decades as only 41% of women - 10.3 million - read a daily UK newspaper (October to March 2008).
Genevieve Roberts, a former features writer and reporter for The Independent, now an advertising planner for McCann Erickson on the Evening Standard account, told me: "Almost every newspaper is trying to appeal to female readers. In crude commercial terms, females are the main shoppers in more than 50% of households, and advertisers want to appeal to people who shop so they have the opportunity to buy their product."
This is the crux of the issue, advertising is now more than ever driving the bottom-line of newspapers, and it is crucial that newspapers attract the right demographic to appeal to advertising agencies and businesses.
Without female readers, the advertisers will look elsewhere.
The Glossy Magazine Approach
Newspapers are tackling this problem in two distinctly different ways: the glossy/gossip magazine approach and the female interest approach.
Daily Mirror (From July 2007 to December 2007: Female = 43%)
Daily Mirror Editor Richard Wallace has discretely changed the focus of the newspaper from the traditional male-orientated tabloid to appeal to women who buy popular weekly gossip magazines.
Andrew Higton, a sub-editor at The Mirror, told me that this marketing approach has involved a significant change in culture for the staff. Editors, reporters and sub-editors are often told to make copy more "female-friendly". This new approach is applied at all levels, for example, when President Nicolas Sarkozy of France visited the UK, subs were told to focus much of the story on Carla Brunei's outfits.
The Daily Mirror's shift towards the glossy magazine style has also involved changing the look of the whole newspaper in an attempt to make it more visually appealing to the female market. The newspaper has now gone full-colour, redesigned its features pages, covers female issues such as family life and children, and it contains more celebrity-focused pictures alongside the news stories.
This is also the approach that Richard Desmond's Daily Express is following. The newspaper is using its experience in the magazine market (Richard Desmond is the proprietor of the increasingly popular weekly glossy magazine, "OK!") to attract women readers. It is also the path that several of the new free daily newspapers are following, such as The London Paper, which regularly features celebrity stories on its front page.
However, Helen Lewis, sub-editor at the Daily Mail, said to me that she is not so sure that the glossy magazine route is correct. She told me, "The problem lies in conflating 'female interest' with 'celebrity story', and although it's been a successful formula, I think it's one that's coming to the end of its usefulness in terms of shifting copies."
The Daily Mail is the most successful newspaper in the UK in terms of attracting female readers. In 1995 (Jan to Dec) 49% of its readers were female, in 2006 (Jan to Dec) this had grown to 52% and the figures for 2007 show that it had held onto this 52% demographic. The Daily Mail enjoys more female than male readers. However, it has not completely gone down the celebrity gossip/magazine style. Undoubtedly it does feature these kinds of stories, but it balances this with news stories and a style proven to attract female readers. According to the National Readership Survey, women care about news - it being their "main reason for purchase" - but they like to be told pretty briskly what has happened, but not what it all may or may not mean. The survey also indicates that British women are turned off by sport and are not too keen on finance.
A quick glance at the Daily Mail after reading this data shows how the Daily Mail has struck the right balance to appeal to the female demographic.
Genevieve Roberts told me during an interview on this issue: "In the UK, the Daily Mail has the highest percentage of female readers, and unsurprisingly, this increases its appeal for advertisers."
The Times (From July 2007 to December 2007: Female = 42%)
These magazins are not aimed solely at women, but The Times' chose to advertise to females when it re-launched the supplement, indicating the importance of female readers to this publication. In a £1m-plus campaign, they targeted a cross-section of women: professionals, housewives and mothers.
The Wall Street Journal Online appears to agree with The Times and the Daily Mail's approach for attracting female readers. In May of this year it launched a new section aimed at a female audience, however, it is also not going down the glossy magazine route. WSJ Online executive editor Alan Murray told Reuters, "Our experience has shown us that there are a lot of business and professional women out there who crave not just fashion and beauty advice, but an intelligent news-oriented community where they can share experiences and swap ideas."
Early indicators point to the Female Interest Approach as having the most success, but only time will tell which strategy works in the long run. The battle lines have been drawn in one of the world's most aggressive newspaper markets, and it is certainly a battle that other editors will watch with interest.
Paul Chaney has come up with a list of essential blog copywriting tips for any bloggers, reports practical ecommerce.
He states that a veteran magazine editor once told him: "Never edit your own stuff." However, with the rise of the independent blogger and rapid 24/7 news culture we sometimes have no choice.
Here are his key tips:
Use spellcheck. Chaney states, "if you're blogging for business, I think correctly spelled words along with the use of proper grammar is a non-negotiable." He also points out that a common error when creating web copy is saying "you" when the poster meant to say "your." Spellcheck will not catch that error.
Proofread the post using preview mode. Chaney says it is better to print your copy and proofread it that way. The main point being to proofread the posting.
Read the piece aloud. Chaney believes its, "another way for your brain to wrap itself around the text and insure it has a logical, readable flow."
Practice using acceptable style (AP style), but not at the expense of forsaking your own. Despite this Chaney says it is important to develop your own voice.
Chances are you've heard all about the now-'resolved' dispute that opposed the Associated Press to social news sharing site Drudge Retort, over the fair - or unfair - use of AP quotes. Even more likely is the possibility that you've heard emotion-filled - and perhaps inaccurate - coverage of the affair. So this is an attempt to untangle some of the knots.
The four-point recap, clarifications Lesson one: The blogosphere's outcry is heard Lesson two: but the winner is? Lesson three: AP - "Whither" or "Adapt"? Change the DMCA or set a legal precedent?
The four-point recap, clarifications
If you haven't followed the story, here's a four-point recap (or skip to next):
- Earlier this month, AP demanded that the Drudge Retort take down seven entries, which were in its view violating policies of fair use of content and the agency's copyright (AP wants to charge outside sources for using for excerpts longer than four words). - Drudge Retort Web host Rogers Cadenhead consequently blogged about the takedown notice, and this created a ##-storm in the blogosphere, with many influential bloggers including TechCrunch's Michael Arrington and BuzzMachine's Jeff Jarvis calling on the boycott of AP content. - Shortly after, on June 16, AP retreated, but didn't recant: it admitted that its request had been "heavy-handed" but didn't withdraw the takedown notices. - Then, on June 19, AP issued a statement to say its conflict with Cadenhead had been resolved, after AP lawyers gave him guidelines to make the postings suitable, and that "both parties consider the matter closed." This really meant that Cadenhead agreed to modify the contested items and ended up not reposting them.
The guidelines discussed with Cadenhead have yet to be made public though, and the AP is working on a new set of guidelines for "fair use" of its content in general. "If AP's guidelines end up like the ones they shared with me, we're headed for a Napster-style battle on the issue of fair use," Cadenhead wrote on his blog. He told the New York Times' Saul Hansell that some of the key issues for AP related to protecting headlines and first paragraphs of stories.
First clarification: unlike what has been widely echoed on the Web and suggested by another New York Times article on June 16, AP was never supposed to meet the Media Bloggers Association (MBA) in order to draft guidelines for all bloggers, according to MBA PresidentRobert Cox.
Another clarification: the blogosphere went ablaze when it learned that AP had filed a lawsuit against Cadenhead in June, seemingly out of the blue. According to Cox though, "Drudge Retort got on AP's radar due to the posting of entire articles with exact headlines which all parties agreed constituted copyright violations two months BEFORE the most recent spate of Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) Take Down Notices."
Lesson one: The blogosphere's outcry is heard
News of the Associated Press' June take-down notices was met with severe criticism, calls for boycott - and many profanities - by the blogosphere.
In one of his posts, entitled "FU AP," Jarvis wrote: "Bloggers, unless the AP recants and apologizes to Cadenhead, I urge you to avoid linking to the AP and to link to reporting at its source." Jarvis also encouraged bloggers to copy-paste full AP stories.
In a self-admittedly "ridiculous" post, after being quoted in an AP story, Harrington announced that "I've called my lawyers (really) and have asked them to deliver a DMCA takedown demand to the A.P. And I will also be sending them a bill for $12.50." According to Harrington this "is exactly what the A.P. would have charged me if I published a 22 word quote from one of their articles."
That short posting alone generated more than 230 comments - most of which were harshly critical of AP's stance at the time. The wildfire that spread in the blogosphere and the seemingly rapid turn-about of AP once again illustrated a known fact: blogs have gained enough traction and buzz-generating capacity to concretely influence and shape the media landscape.
Lesson two: but the winner is?
One - erroneous - interpretation is to say that bloggers - won their battle against the traditional media Goliath, which was trying "to impose some guidelines on the free-wheeling blogosphere, where extensive quoting and even copying of entire news articles is common," - a quote from a New York Times story. (The Times' coverage of the affair was, according to Harrington, hindered by a conflict of interest, considering that the Times is one of AP's members and sits on its board of directors.)
But this isn't a victory for bloggers. "The A.P. is going to assert a much stricter interpretation of fair use than most people on the Internet are used to," reported Hansell on the Bits blog.
As mentioned above, Cadenhead had to agree to AP's proposed modifications, and ended up not reposting the material. Furthermore, this case is really a microcosm for the bigger issue of how to adapt "fair use" policies and copyright to the digital age in general.
"I'm glad that my personal legal dispute with the AP is resolved, thanks to the help of the Media Bloggers Association, but it does nothing to resolve the larger conflict between how AP interprets fair use and how thousands of people are sharing news on the web," wrote Cadenhead, following his two-hour conversation and settlement with the AP.
"I think AP and other media organizations should focus on how to encourage bloggers to link their stories in the manner they like, rather than hoping their lawyers can rebottle the genie of social news."
While Cadenhead may be right in terms of global news consumption trends on the Web, the AP was clearly in its own right under the US DMCA, at least regarding the stories posted in their entirety with the same headline. But the legal provisions concerning "fair use" of content for smaller excerpts have remained vague - simply undefined - until now, something the AP hopes to reform by setting guidelines.
"I think it would be helpful for bloggers and users of social news sites to know what the AP believes to be fair use of their copyrighted work," said Cadenhead's lawyer. But "I hope that any guidelines that are issued are not interpreted as an agreed definition of fair use" under copyright law.
Lesson three: AP - "Whither" or "Adapt"? Change the DMCA or set a legal precedent?
The Associated Press versus Drudge Retort - blogosphere - affair throws light onto two main issues:
- Does this case exemplify the 'old media' versus 'new media' divide? Is the AP's stance representative of its inability to adapt to a new context?
Yes, in the eyes of new media guru Jarvis: "I value the AP and don't want it to die. I want it to morph to a new model and a new future. But I am afraid that in its fights, we are seeing its inability to adapt."
On the other hand, few bloggers have pondered the more controversial view that the AP's approach may actually be a sign of its willingness to adapt - granted, not yet to the 'utopian' world copyright-lessness. But the AP, in its own way and after being "heavy-handed," is now attempting to define new standards that are adapted to the digital age. (Read this note on June 13 by Jim Kennedy, VP and Director of Strategy for AP.) No doubt some of the outspoken bloggers mentioned previously could be quick to shatter this argument.
- As is often the case, the law doesn't evolve as rapidly as the context it seeks to protect. The blurry wordings of the current DMCA must either be reformed quickly, after multilateral consultation, or the issue of "fair use" of content will eventually be settled in court and set a precedent, costing either news organizations or bloggers - presumably both.
This is the real issue at stake: how fast can the law be adapted to the reality of the Web, in order to avoid costly conflicts over subjective interpretations of "fair use" of content? As Hansell concluded in the Bits blog, "the unsettled state of the law makes it a gamble to take the matter to court."
A costly gamble, whether it ends in a loss for the AP or for bloggers. Or both.
Note that, just in case, no AP material longer than four words was excerpted in the above.
Bloggers: you can also watch this video by DigitalJournal.com for advice from Harvard Citizen Media Law Project Director David Ardia.
A quick financial roundup for the NYT and Gannett, two main US newspaper publishers, according to paidcontent.org:
- The New York Times Co.'s online ad revenues grew 25.6% in April, although total operation's revenue was down 2.2% year on year. General ad revenues were down 5.1% over the same period. - Gannett didn't reveal its online performance, but it said it had increased its unique visitors to 25.5 million, up 10.4% since last year. Unfortunately, Gannett's ad revenues decreased by 10.4% also compared to last year.
Although the growth rate of online revenues seems to be picking up again, these gains still aren't sufficient to compensate for print ad losses at this point.
He'll describe the last 3 years at the Times, as "it has attempted to make what I consider to be a historic shift in its mission," towards a much more rounded and "almost platform-agnostic" approach.
Roberts isn't one of those online editors who have an instinctive aversion for print, to the contrary - he worked as a print journalist and editor, as well as a National news editor at the Times. Although he resists calling the Times 'print-centric', it's a fact that print still accounts for over 80% of the company's revenues, and that "our main mission still is putting out a print publication," he said.
One key factor in the NYT's integration process was the gradual approach adopted by the newspaper, instead of "a radical shakeup" - similar to the Guardian's approach in that respect.
"There was a change in newsroom culture and it had its rocky moments, I certainly can't minimize that," said Roberts.
But "We haven't ordered anyone to focus on digital journalism to the exclusion of everything else." Instead, "We've encouraged people to think of Web as one of an array of tools and outlets to report the news."
Here are some of the other factors that made the Times' integration approach successful, in Roberts' view:
- The creation of a Continuous News Desk, in 1999, first appealed to foreign correspondents. With the help of staff based in New York, the reporters could publish stories online that could instantly be read by their sources. This established the foundations for print reporters seeking the advantages of online.
- Not having evolved through edicts, but by engaging staff's brains: give the print reporters the necessary tools.
- Teaching journalists that the Web can mean more and better ways to tell stories.
- Two years ago, the Times 'planted' multimedia editors at each news desk. This led to increased print-online collaboration on stories and to successful enterprise-type projects, where the Web content complemented the print articles, and vice versa (see this multimedia project about prisoners that were exonerated by DNA evidence, which complemented ex-prisoner profiles in the print edition).
- Roberts' own print background, thus trusting relationship with the paper's reporters. "One of my chores has been to eliminate the fear aspect of it (writing for the Web)."
- Last but not least, tell reporters that if they don't report online, their competitors will: "If I could point to one thing that has really worked, it is appealing to reporters' competitive instincts."
Roberts will speak in the second session of the World Editors Forum, entitled "Are integrated newsrooms really working?" View other interviews in this preview series by clicking here.
The Editors Weblog is
running a series of exclusive
interviews about the future of journalism with top editors at leading
newspapers around the world. Here is the latest installment with Abdul Hamid Ahmad, Editor-in-Chief of Gulf News, based in Dubai.
The
list of upcoming interviews will be updated as they are published (click here to view all interviews in this series).
Among the other titles that have been asked to participate in these
interviews are:
Questions: "News, journalism, newspapers: same past, different futures?" How long do you think you will define your company as a newspaper company or a print company?
Gulf News cannot be pigeonholed as either a newspaper company or a print company. It is a content provider. This means that it supplies news to print, online, radio or any other required medium. The organization will survive and sustain in this role that is its core functionality. We do have commercial printing facilities but our focus will always be news, irrespective of where it is published.
At this year's World Economic Forum in Davos, a panel of futurists claimed that print newspapers wouldn't exist by 2014. To what extent do you agree with this?
I strongly disagree with this point of view. Firstly, more than two thirds of the world doesn't have internet access; it perhaps has some limited access to television, which leaves print or newspaper as the main medium for receiving news. While circulation may be plateauing and in some cases declining in the West, it continues to increase in Asia and Africa for the aforesaid reasons. If internet has to make an impact, there would need to be development in infrastructure, increased investment, better education and other facilities in place. So the decline in Europe and America is compensated by growth in Asia and Africa for newspapers. The year 2014 is very close; I definitely do not see newspapers losing its significance by then.
In journalism's multi-centennial history, do you view the emergence of digital journalism as part of the continuity, or as a complete breakaway with previous forms of journalism?
Digital journalism is part of the continued journey of journalism. When television arrived, people heralded the doom of radio. Today, radio is doing very well and moving from strength to strength. One form of media helps another. Technology has helped journalism evolve and we need to adapt to the changes.
Do you believe in the increasingly active role of the user in the news process, and is it a threat or an opportunity for professional journalists?
Readers or users are the support system of the journalistic process. There wouldn't be any value to our work without them. Nobody can function in isolation. The increasingly active role of the reader/user in the news process is an opportunity not a threat for professional journalists. We should use the chance to educate readers so that the quality of interaction could be more professional. Ultimately there will always be amateurs and professionals in the world; people need to choose who they deal with.
Do you consider the Golden Age of investigative journalism is already past, or just beginning?
The Golden Age of investigative journalism is just beginning. As our world shrinks with increased connectivity and people's access to information increases, they are no longer satisfied with the superficial. They want more... they want to know in depth. They want to know what lies beneath the surface. Can journalism survive newspapers?
Journalism is not dependent on newspapers for its survival. It existed from the time man learnt to communicate through images, words and sounds. Its root or seed lies in speech. When a tribesman climbed atop a rocky outcrop to call out to his people - that was journalism, he was giving them information. Among ancient Arab civilizations, poets functioned as journalists. They conveyed political messages, news, propaganda and other information through poetry. So journalism has existed for a while. Today it has found a home in print, online, television and radio. In the future it will find other means, but survive it will. Journalism will exist as long as man can talk.
Stay tuned for the next week's interviews, which will include The New York Times and the Financial Times.
![Digg](http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&&url=http://www.editorsweblog.org/analysis/2008/09/the_future_of_investigative_journalism_p_1.php&bodytext=<b>Lowell Bergmann</b> is a ground breaking investigative reporter, a producer/correspondent for the PBS documentary series "<b>Frontline</b>" in the US and spent 14 years as a producer with CBS's "<b>60 Minutes</b>". <br /><br /><form contenteditable="false" mt:asset-id="796" class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://www.editorsweblog.org/images-3.jpeg"><img alt="images-3.jpeg" src="http://www.editorsweblog.org/images-3-thumb-100x149.jpeg" class="mt-image-left" style="margin: 0pt 20px 20px 0pt; float: left;" height="149" width="100" /></a></form>Bergman shared a <b>Pulitzer Prize</b> for Public Service with <i>The New York Times</i> in 2004 for "A Dangerous Business," (which detailed a record of egregious worker safety violations coupled with the systematic violation of environmental laws in the iron sewer and water pipe industry) and is a Professor at the <b>UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism</b>. Furthermore, he is a co-founder of the <b>Centre for Investigative Journalism</b> and a consultant at <b>ProPublica</b>, an independent, non-profit newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest.<br /><br />The story of Bergman's investigation of the tobacco industry for 60 Minutes was chronicled in the 1999 Academy Award-nominated feature film "<b>The Insider</b>", in which Bergman was portrayed by <b>Al Pacino</b> (below left).<br /><br /><form contenteditable="false" mt:asset-id="798" class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://www.editorsweblog.org/images-1.jpeg"><img alt="images-1.jpeg" src="http://www.editorsweblog.org/images-1-thumb-150x99.jpeg" class="mt-image-left" style="margin: 0pt 20px 20px 0pt; float: left;" height="99" width="150" /></a></form>The Editors Weblog contacted Lowell Bergman - who was an early adopter and advocate of the multimedia model - to discover his views on the key issues facing investigative reporting and its future.<br /><br />EW: <b>What do you see in the future for investigative journalism? Do you still see it as having a home at newspapers?</b><br /><br />LB: Investigative journalism in America has always been done by magazines and in books as well as in newspaper. For many years newspapers were not doing much of it. It was a 'freelance' occupation usually with writers like <b>I.F. Stone</b> and others who left newspapers because they were too restrictive. Personally, I have been using the web and been 'online' for more than a decade.<br /><br />But it remains true that it is newspapers and traditional news organizations that produce almost all the new information everyday.<br /><br />Pure web based operations with a few new exceptions recycle information they get from those organizations. We will see web based sites becoming the providers of more and more news and quality information in the future, but the transition will take time.<br /><br />EB: <b>What do you see as the key issue facing your profession?</b><br /><br />LB: I am not sure it is a 'profession' in the traditional sense. In this country it is open to everyone. It is not licensed. Right now the transformation of the media endangers the collective experience of news people who chose to make gathering, investigating and presenting quality information their life work. That is why <b>non-profits and educational institutions [Universities] will become more and more important.</b> They do not have the same pressures. <b>Its a time of transition, a kind of "Middle Age", that will not see a resurgence of real reporting until the economic questions are resolved.</b><br /><br />EW: <b>How has new media changed the way you work?<br /></b><br />LB: Obviously, the availability of databases, newspaper archives and all sorts of information on the Web makes many things easier. But the old techniques and standards have not been replaced. To do investigative or in depth reporting you have take the time to meet people, and not meet them in a chat room.<br /><br />Confidentiality on the internet is virtually impossible. It depends on trust. And trust is the weakest link in terms of the reliability of information offered up on the Web by so called 'new media'.<br /><br />EW: <b>Do you think there is more pressure from editors with the advent of the 24-hour news culture? Are investigative journalists getting the time and resources necessary? </b><br /><br />LB: At a certain point you are a stenographer, if you don't have enough time to do the kind of reporting that advances what we know. This is not just true of 'investigative' reporters. <br /><br />All good reporting involves asking some skeptical questions and not assuming what you are told is true. When I think of 'investigative reporting' I mean reporting in the public interest that looks deeply into a subject or story. Often it involves developing sources or hunting for documents or both and having the time to explore what they mean. At the same time in the best of all world's your editor is happy if you come back and say there is no story, or the story you originally went in pursuit of changed. <br /><br />So, in answer to your question t<b>he pressure of a failing economic model by definition means there is less time. </b>Prior to the decline of newspapers, broadcasters in the U.S. freed from the strictures around licensing that once forced them to present programming in the public interest along with operating with the threat of punishment created worldwide news gathering organizations. They had the incentive to do documentaries and present them even if the ratings were far below those of entertainment. That is no longer the case so you have less in depth reporting on the air as well.<br /><br />EW: <b>Is the law now having an impact on your profession? Is the law becoming more restrictive for journalists in general, and investigative journalists in particular?</b><br /><br />LB: Not really. There has been a squeeze on the confidential source privilege, but it appears that Congress and a new President will sign a federal 'shield law'. The issues surrounding what is called national security reporting and/or criminal cases where a prosecutor or defendant has no where else to turn for information are unlikely to be resolved by the legislation. It is more of a question of the attitude/discretion of the prosecutors.<br /><br />EW: <b>Do you feel protected by the law? </b><br /><br />LB: I never expect 'protection'. My sources do. <br /><br />EW: <b>How do you think an editor should best manage an investigative reporting team or reporter? </b><br /><br />LB: Briefly, they should provide insight, encouragement and support, especially when the going gets tough.<br /><br />EW: <b>Who are the main competition to newspaper investigative reporters now? What are your thoughts on groups such as ProPublica?</b><br /><br />This work is non profit. I have even called it 'anti-profit' by its very nature. So ProPublica, I am a consultant, or the Center for Investigative Reporting, I am one of the founders, are non profits working the public interest. Basically, that is what a very good newspaper newsroom does: report stories without fear or favor, and without considering the resources needed to do that. <b>It is at its root a non-profit activity.<br /><br /><br /></b><br /> <div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div>&title=The Future of Investigative Journalism Part 2: <b>Pulitzer prize winner Lowell Bergman</b> - "It is at its root a non-profit activity"){kind=link}
![Digg](http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&&url=http://www.editorsweblog.org/analysis/2008/05/nyt_digital_news_editor_on_integration_g.php&bodytext=<form contenteditable="false" mt:asset-id="518" class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://www.editorsweblog.org/S2-Roberts%2C%20Jim%202006.jpg"><img alt="Roberts, Jim 2006.jpg" src="http://www.editorsweblog.org/S2-Roberts,%20Jim%202006-thumb-150x224.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="margin: 0pt 20px 20px 0pt; float: left;" height="224" width="150" /></a></form><b>Jim Roberts</b>, digital news editor at <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/"><i>The New York Times</i></a>, will speak of the newsroom integration process undergone by the paper of record at the upcoming <a href="http://www.wansweden2008.com/articles.php?id=114"><b>World Editors Forum</b>, to be held June 1-4 in Gothenburg</a>, Sweden. <br /><br />He'll describe the last 3 years at the Times, as "it has attempted to make what I consider to be a historic shift in its mission," towards a much more rounded and "almost platform-agnostic" approach.<br /><br />Roberts isn't one of those online editors who have an instinctive aversion for print, to the contrary - he worked as a print journalist and editor, as well as a National news editor at the Times. Although he resists calling the Times 'print-centric', it's a fact that print still accounts for over 80% of the company's revenues, and that "our main mission still is putting out a print publication," he said.<br /><br />One key factor in the NYT's integration process was the gradual approach adopted by the newspaper, instead of "a radical shakeup" - similar to the <a href="http://www.editorsweblog.org/newsrooms_and_journalism/2008/05/uk_guardian_announces_integration_plans.php"><i>Guardian</i>'s approach</a> in that respect.<br /><br />"There was a change in newsroom culture and it had its rocky moments, I certainly can't minimize that," said Roberts.<br /><br />But "We haven't ordered anyone to focus on digital journalism to the exclusion of everything else." Instead, "We've encouraged people to think of Web as one of an array of tools and outlets to report the news."<br /><br />Here are some of the other factors that made the Times' integration approach successful, in Roberts' view:<br /><br />- The creation of a Continuous News Desk, in 1999, first appealed to foreign correspondents. With the help of staff based in New York, the reporters could publish stories online that could instantly be read by their sources. This established the foundations for print reporters seeking the advantages of online.<br /><br />- Not having evolved through edicts, but by engaging staff's brains: give the print reporters the necessary tools.<br /><br />- Teaching journalists that the Web can mean more and better ways to tell stories.<br /><br />- Two years ago, the Times 'planted' multimedia editors at each news desk. This led to increased print-online collaboration on stories and to successful enterprise-type projects, where the Web content complemented the print articles, and vice versa (<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2007/11/25/nyregion/20071125_DNAI_FEATURE.html">see this multimedia project</a> about prisoners that were exonerated by DNA evidence, which complemented ex-prisoner profiles in the print edition). <br /><br />- Roberts' own print background, thus trusting relationship with the paper's reporters. "One of my chores has been to eliminate the fear aspect of it (writing for the Web)."<br /><br />- Last but not least, tell reporters that if they don't report online, their competitors will: "If I could point to one thing that has really worked, it is appealing to reporters' competitive instincts." <br /><br /><br />Roberts will speak in the second session of the <a href="http://www.wansweden2008.com/articles.php?id=114">World Editors Forum</a>, entitled "Are integrated newsrooms really working?" View other interviews in this preview series by <a href="http://www.editorsweblog.org/special.php?tag=Gearing%20up%20for%20Gothenburg&IncludeBlogs=1">clicking here</a>.<br /><br />Source: <b>Jim Roberts</b>, Digital News Editor, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/"><i>The New York Times<br /></i></a><br /> &title=<b>Göteborg</b>:<b><i>NYT</i></b> digital news editor on integration: gradual is successful){kind=link}