Media Law, Lecture 9: Investigative Journalism

Investigative journalism is the hidden world, the story off the agenda, something that is there to shock and surprise the viewer. It is about discovering the truth and to identify what truth you can expose as the journalists goes to the news, the news never goes to the journalist.

Gonzo journalism is a prime example of investigative journalism, which consists of presenter0led investigation  The news agenda starts to become more exciting, than your standard court story. It is seen as more fulfilling than ordinary journalism and can open doors to the unknown, putting the journalist inside the story.

The fourth estate once again crops up as journalists we are there to expose the truth to the viewers and investigate corruption at every level. There are many examples of this historically with the Dreyfus Affair and the founder of investigative journalism, Emile Zola. But, who is Emile Zola and why is he important?

 Time for short history lesson.

After the French defeat to the Prussian (German) army in 1870, the French army were trying to find someone to blame and started to blame French-Jewish soldiers. They were  accused of selling French army military secrets to the Prussian army. Captain Alfred Dreyfus was accused of being the ringleader of the group. He was found guilty in a show trial and was sentenced to life on Devil's Island in French Guiana and placed in solitary confinement. 

Emile Zola believed that the French army had framed Dreyfus, however after being trialed and found guilty for criminal libel, Zola was exiled to live the rest of his life in Surrey. The trial was brought about due to the letter  Zola published, which possibly  is the most famous piece of investigative journalism in history.

J'accuse was an open letter written by Zola in the French newspaper L'Aurore. The letter was directed at the French Premier, Felix Faure, accusing the French of the unlawful and wrong imprisonment of Dreyfus and brought upon the famous quote: "We name the guilty men". This was supported by the first usage of photojournalism, exposing the corruption of the French army.

Even though it would take 15 years after Emile Zola's death for Alfred Dreyfus to be exonerated, it proved that the famous words of Zola laid down the foundations for the careers and success of all investigative journalists, up to this very day. 

Investigative journalism comes with risk as we have to ensure that we protect our sources as we expose people or groups for what they have done. Anyone who provides us with information must be protected and kept anonymous at all costs. 

There is a difference between information that we are given either on or off the record, Any information  provided off the record, must be stricken from the record and never used. A example of this was the leaked information from BBC reporter, Frank Gardener from a discussion he had with The Queen over the extradition of radical cleric, Abu Hamza. 

The evidence gap is seen as the one major legal problem that can face a journalist when trying to defend a investigative report in court. For someone to be convicted under British law it must be "beyond reasonable doubt" in criminal cases. In civil cases it is much easier to convict someone as this required lower levels of proof and it can be determined by the balance of probability. 

There are two cases that are key examples of the evidence gap involving The Death of Stephen Lawrence and The Omagh Bombings. 

Case Study: Stephen Lawrence

Stephen was 18 when he was killed on the night of 22 April 1993 in Eltham, South East London. It was claimed that he was attacked a killed by a group of 5 white men at a bus stop by two stab wounds to the stomach. On February 14 1997, The Daily Mail published a front page with the five men who has been accused of Lawrence's murder with the headline "Murderers" and claimed that if this was not the case then for the paper to sued. 

The men did not sue and ultimately a review to the Criminal Justice Act in 2003 determined that the "double jeopardy" ruling would not apply if there was enough evidence to do so. This happened and in 2011 two of the men; Gary Dobson and David Norris were both found guilty of murder and sentenced both to life in prison. 

This was a example of where the evidence gap did not affect the final outcome, but the Omagh Bombing is a key example of where the evidence gap is proven as a investigative journalists weakness.

Case Study: Omagh Bombing 

On Saturday August 15 1998, a bomb in Omagh in Northern Ireland left 29 people and another 220 injured in the worst single act of terrorism in the history of Northern Ireland. There were claims that the police knew who were responsible for the bombings, but they did not have enough substantial proof to charge anyone with the bombings. It also would of been hard to select a jury due to the strong support for the IRA throughout Ireland during the late 20th century. 

The police in Omagh decided to go the BBC Panorama program in order to try and help establish who was truly involved in the bombings and to bring the people responsible to justice. Panorama revealed the information they had behind who could potentially be responsible for the bombings. However the broadcast would backfire as the IRA retaliated by bombing the front of BBC television centre on 4th March 2001.

No one has been convicted of the Omagh Bombings 14 years after they occurred and this is down to the evidence gap as even though the police may know who is responsible without any evidence, witnesses to convict them "beyond reasonable doubt" is very unlikely. As journalists this may be the biggest constraint that we have from expressing the truth as in all professions, there are limitations.