Why Can't A Journalist Be More Like a Social Scientist? -- And Vice Versa
Summer 1997, Volume 18, Number 2
Social science methods may seem light years removed from the techniques
employed by top-quality investigative journalists. Yet in his February 28 lecture,
David Protess (IPR-Journalism) offered some
striking similarities, particularly in their process of inquiry: - Both
begin with a working hypothesis informed by previous stories (or studies), leads
(or new developments in the field), and critical thinking, often about social
problems.
- Both rigorously test their hypotheses and check out alternatives.
In so doing, investigative reporters employ field methods similar to
ethnographers. A case in point is their growing use of triangulation to
corroborate a working hypothesis.
In Chicago's notorious Ford Heights Four case,
for example, Protess and three Medill students uncovered evidence leading to the
release of four wrongfully convicted African-American men. He described how the
group went about reanalyzing testimony from key witnesses, sifting through
forensic evidence, and searching for alternative suspects. The best of
investigative journalists also share with social scientists a desire to seek
external validity, Protess maintained, and if larger patterns emerge, their
findings can influence public policy issues. He believes the Ford Heights Four
investigation, for example, has had bearing on national debates over capital
punishment, the use of DNA evidence in criminal cases, compensation for the
wrongfully incarcerated, liability of law enforcement officials who prosecute
these cases, and preventative resources to head off miscarriages of justice.
"It is a shame that we should see these two houses as separate," said
Protess, "when in fact we are part of the same kind of process of inquiry in
trying to find truth." Both might benefit, however, from more merging of the
two approaches. "Investigative journalists often miss the bigger picture by
focusing on specific cases and ignoring broader classes, and social scientists
miss an important dimension by dwelling on classes at the expense of rich
material about individual cases," he concluded.