Most journalists I know spent a good part of '92 caught up in the unexpected drama of the presidential campaign and especially bemused by the ways our profession became an issue in it. The emergence of "real people" and "talk" in the information-gathering process was a source of particular concern, and we will be trying to learn from the experience for a good time to come.

A starting point is offered by the findings of a CJR/Roper public opinion poll conducted just before the election. Two thousand voters were asked which they preferred -- questions put to the candidates by ordinary citizens or those asked by journalists. Most (40 percent) preferred those put by nonjournalists, explaining that they posed the questions our respondents wanted answers to. A smaller group (20 percent) preferred questions asked by reporters because they were "harder to dodge." (The rest expressed no preference.)

Ideally, journalists want to satisfy both groups; the first, by reflecting back to them the feel of being there, chattingwith the subject, asking and re-asking the fundamental questions readers and viewers would ask; the second, by aggressively going after the facts, asking tough questions, putting the story together, interpreting, analyzing, and drawing conclusions.

The two approaches are, of course, not mutually exclusive. It was an ordinary citizen who asked George Bush a revealing question: "How is the deficit affecting you, personally?" His bewildered response, even after he understood she meant "recession," gave a better sense of the moment and the man -- his "character" -- than all the "gotcha" questions posed by reporters throughout the campaign.

"The "gotcha" questions made no one happy. The blatant hostility of this approach ill serves the higher objectives of investigative reporting, which these days certainly doesn't need more detractors. The sputtering economy, with the resultant staff cutbacks, has helped to make investigative journalism an endangered genre -- in the print press but perhaps especially in television.

One other reason put forward to explain a loss of heart among once-aggressive reporters and editors is the chilling effect of a spate of libel suits and other judicial challenges that have made it increasingly expensive and time-consuming to defend investigative work. In the months to come, CJR will be paying special attention to this problem; we will monitor relevant decisions and assess the degree to which each threatens press freedoms. Beyond that, we will do all we can to provide moral support by seeking out and encouraging the best investigative work being done and identifying and challenging the forces that threaten to inhibit such efforts.

As '92 illuminated the twin responsibilites of the journalistic community to both shed light and generate heat, so 1993 can be a year in which we fulfill those responsibilities in a style of civility and a spirit of enterprise and resolve.

cjr  |  archive  |  resources  |  contact  |  search  |  subscribe