The Expenses Files a 'triumph for journalism'?
Posted by Christie Silk on June 9, 2009 at 4:32 PM
"It was brilliant, brilliant old fashioned journalism (...) at its finest". Such was the sentiment of Telegraph's assistant editor, Andrew Pierce, expressed last night during the debate over the press handling of the MP's
expenses scandal, 'A triumph for journalism?' at the Front Line club last night.
The Telegraph, basking in the success of its groundbreaking scoop, took the opportunity to reassert the conviction that the obtaining and management of the story represents the best in old school style investigative journalism.
The Telegraph, basking in the success of its groundbreaking scoop, took the opportunity to reassert the conviction that the obtaining and management of the story represents the best in old school style investigative journalism.
That the direct political ramifications of the story have been enormous is irrefutable. Moreover, as last night's debate demonstrates, the scandal has refocused attention back onto the development of quality journalism. The Telegraph has closely guarded the internal management of the story, yet Pierce was apparently more loquacious in his praise of the paper's behaviour in this debate than the editorial team have previously been.
Of great importance is his belief that the 'consequences were massively in the public interest'-ticking the first box for valuable investigative reporting. Yet, as is a very topical predicament, worthy pursuits can only be followed through if there is adequate funding, which Pierce did not try to disguise, "Of course it's been terrific for the circulation - we're a newspaper and we're there to make sales". The margin for error when dealing with such delicate data are high and the implications grave. Pierce is satisfied that the Telegraph was forced to publish one correction, "I'd say in terms of journalism that ain't a bad ratio." One area which remains shrouded in secrecy is the issue of payment for the tip off. "Fleet Street has existed for years on leaks" maintained Pierce as he battled off the host's, media columnist Roy Greenslade's efforts, "we will stick to our guns (...) and not discuss whether money changed hands".
The story has certainly captured the imagination of the reporting contingent. Journalism.co.uk's Judith Townend expressed her take on the episode as triumphant return of classic investigative journalist tools and the eschewing of 'new' paths of leaking and reporting.
'For raw blogging it is not. Any CAR is kept secret in-house. Sharing the process? Pah! This is as far away from a Jarvian vision of journalism built-in-beta as you can imagine. While other news operations - the Telegraph's own included - increasingly open up the inner workings (former Telegraph editor Martin Newland's team at The National in Abu Dhabi tweeted live from a significant meeting yesterday morning) not a social media peep comes from the bunker till the paper arrives back from the printers.'
Apparently, the Telegraph has more up its sleeve, although Pierce refused to reveal any details last night. What is certain, however, is that whatever story follows, it will come under scrutiny from journalists and media commentators debating its worth as a piece of quality investigative journalism.
Source: journalism.co.uk
Of great importance is his belief that the 'consequences were massively in the public interest'-ticking the first box for valuable investigative reporting. Yet, as is a very topical predicament, worthy pursuits can only be followed through if there is adequate funding, which Pierce did not try to disguise, "Of course it's been terrific for the circulation - we're a newspaper and we're there to make sales". The margin for error when dealing with such delicate data are high and the implications grave. Pierce is satisfied that the Telegraph was forced to publish one correction, "I'd say in terms of journalism that ain't a bad ratio." One area which remains shrouded in secrecy is the issue of payment for the tip off. "Fleet Street has existed for years on leaks" maintained Pierce as he battled off the host's, media columnist Roy Greenslade's efforts, "we will stick to our guns (...) and not discuss whether money changed hands".
The story has certainly captured the imagination of the reporting contingent. Journalism.co.uk's Judith Townend expressed her take on the episode as triumphant return of classic investigative journalist tools and the eschewing of 'new' paths of leaking and reporting.
'For raw blogging it is not. Any CAR is kept secret in-house. Sharing the process? Pah! This is as far away from a Jarvian vision of journalism built-in-beta as you can imagine. While other news operations - the Telegraph's own included - increasingly open up the inner workings (former Telegraph editor Martin Newland's team at The National in Abu Dhabi tweeted live from a significant meeting yesterday morning) not a social media peep comes from the bunker till the paper arrives back from the printers.'
Apparently, the Telegraph has more up its sleeve, although Pierce refused to reveal any details last night. What is certain, however, is that whatever story follows, it will come under scrutiny from journalists and media commentators debating its worth as a piece of quality investigative journalism.
Source: journalism.co.uk
2 Comments
Leave a comment
Related Entries
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: The Expenses Files a 'triumph for journalism'?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.editorsweblog.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/18437










Thanks for the link. Just to make clear my own view: it's a newspaper having enormous impact with its revelations, I think it's a fantastic set of reports and I think it will make film plot material, but that doesn't mean I don't wish the Telegraph hadn't shared the process more and incorporated more transparency and online interaction into the 'old fashioned' methods. I've found some of the more useful expenses discussion and follow-up questions arising on very localised blogs. I actually think a bit more 'beta' would have been of great public interest. I'm currently following up the points Stephen Tall raised with the panel about errors made. The other thing that's extraordinary to me is how readily other media organisations have taken the Telegraph's words as gospel, without seeing raw data, or doing enough of their own checking in some cases. More to follow; I'll post the links here when piece/s are published.
Thanks, Judith for the clarification. I look forward to reading the follow up.