With James O’Keefe’s latest video sting taking two scalps at NPR this week, we thought it timely to revisit some infamous recent and not-so-recent journalistic stings. From The Mirage Tavern to, yes, James O’Keefe—we didn’t go back so far as Nellie Bly—we’re checking out what happened in each case, what went down after the sting went public, and then giving our thoughts on just how much merit the controversial deception approach had in each case.
How exactly do we assess such a thing? It’s not scientific. But Poynter’s Bob Steele has ventured in the past to provide a checklist of rather strict guidelines that must all be adhered to if deception is to be justified in journalism. These include: the information obtained being in the public interest; all alternative methods of obtaining the information being exhausted; the story being told fully; any harm prevented outweighing the harm caused by the deception; and all ethical and legal issues being closely considered. With those in mind, and the particulars of each case on hand, here’s our trip down an ethically murky memory lane.
Chicago Sun-Times Moonlights at the Mirage
What happened: In perhaps the most elaborate journalistic sting, the Chicago Sun-Times went into partnership with citizens’ group the Better Government Association to buy a seedy bar on 731 N. Wells Street for a $5,000 down payment. They dubbed it, appropriately, The Mirage Tavern. In a twenty-five-part series that began in January 1978, the paper showed how the bar—manned by reporters, some of whom had taken a bartending course to prepare for their side job—managed to evade building code violations through bribes to city inspectors all under the guidance of Chicago landlord Philip Barasch. According to a Time report on the series, Barasch only advised against bribing the police because “if you pay off a cop, they keep coming around every month, like flies ”
What came of it: The story was a big’n, making international headlines and implicating everyone from the city’s fire and plumbing inspectors to the people overseeing the pinball machine. FAIR reports that “A federal investigation of the inspectors quickly led to indictments for 29 electrical inspectors, while the Illinois Revenue Department created a 12-man ‘Mirage Audit Unit.’”
Our thoughts: Legend has it that Ben Bradlee and Eugene Patterson dashed any hope of a Pulitzer because they convinced the board that a truth-telling enterprise should not engage in deception. I don’t know that we’d be so harsh in retrospect. The reporters surely could have gotten the story by more traditional means—there was a city full of taverns to scour for sources—but it likely would have been riddled with anonymity, and thus lacked the impact it eventually had. It would likely have been less definitive and less immediate. There was a serious story here to be told about corruption and public safety—just look at the indictments. It’s a question of weighing your deceptions: which deception, the inspectors’ or the reporters’, was most offensive.
The ACORN Pimp
What Happened: Hannah Giles and James O’Keefe, two young conservative activists, posed as a prostitute and her friend and visited five Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) offices asking for tax advice. Damningly, the video recordings O’Keefe and Giles gathered—which were released on Andrew Breitbart’s Big Government website—show ACORN workers telling Giles to list her occupation as “entertainer,” “performance artist,” or “freelancer,” instead of prostitute, and describing how to claim underage girls the pair were trafficking from Central America as dependents on her tax return.
What came of it: The story was huge. Fox News ran wild with it and the mainstream media eventually caught up—the Times public editor Clark Hoyt scolded his own paper for being late to the party. Soon after, Congress voted to cease funding for ACORN and in March 2010 the forty-year-old organization announced it was shutting down.

Why do you treat James O'Keefe's politically motivated stings as examples of journalism? I see no evidence that his goal has ever been to unearth facts, only to embarrass and strip funds from organizations opposed by his rightwing sponsors.
#1 Posted by Al Horne, CJR on Thu 10 Mar 2011 at 04:03 PM
For its examination of the DATELINE NBC "To Catch A Predator" programs, my Belo colleagues at WFAA-TV were awarded the duPont Columbia Silver Baton.
#2 Posted by Stuart Watson, CJR on Thu 10 Mar 2011 at 04:25 PM
Funny, 'Slate' just did almost the same exact story today. A herd of independent minds?
I also remember a case when a Democratic activist managed to tap into a cell phone communication between Newt Gingrich and some fellow GOPster in Florida back in the 1990s. It was then given to left-wing Rep. Jim McDermott, who went public with it. The contents of the tap didn't reveal anything much except Republican political strategies, which McDermott and the lik-minded are inclined to be the equivalent of criminal conspiracy. I believe the cell-phone recorder was prosecuted.
#3 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Thu 10 Mar 2011 at 04:50 PM
@al horrne: puh and leeze...you *really* want to go down the road of "whos a journalist"? Why do lefties find so many excuses for retricting speech you don't like? How different from Assange is it? He admitted his motive is to embarass the USA...but that doesnt make his information any less important.
Enough with the ad hominem already!!!
#4 Posted by I.F.Stoner, CJR on Thu 10 Mar 2011 at 06:14 PM
"the largest beef recall in U.S. history in February 2008—143 pounds of beef from the slaughterhouse."
Only 143 pounds?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/02/18/us-food-recall-hallmark-idUSN1760137220080218
"143 million lbs"
I hate it when that happens. No biggie.
#5 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Thu 10 Mar 2011 at 11:13 PM
"you *really* want to go down the road of "whos a journalist""
When people fabricate evidence to leave an untrue impression, they are not journalists - they are storytellers and, in the case of O'Keefe, con men.
The same rules apply to Michael Moore as they do Matt Drudge and his once toadie Breitbart as they do Dan Rather, if they knowingly present information to spread a false impression, then they are not journalists. They are advocates if not propagandists.
And in the case of Breitbart, in the Shirley Sherrod aftermath it was clear he was a liar. If it's not clear there, then this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIX0POQQOW8
where he defends O'keefe's lying should make it clear.
Dan Rather was ostracized from the journalism world based on less ill intent.
http://www.hd.net/programs/danrather/
And yet the wulitzer still spins for dishonest reporting.
#6 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Thu 10 Mar 2011 at 11:15 PM
Apropos historic undercover reporting, just wanted to share that tomorrow (Saturday 3/12) at the Joint Journalism Historians Conference, being held at NYU Journalism, I'm going to preview the open source database of U.S. undercover reporting I've created in collaboration with the digital team at NYU's Bobst Library. It currently goes back as far as 1822 and includes the literally hundreds (yes) of major impact (yes) undercover ventures in all media, many with links to or PDFs of the original pieces. The database is an outgrowth of the research for a forthcoming book for Northwestern's VIsions of the American Press series. The database is still in development but the eventual url will be undercoverreporting.org.
#7 Posted by Brooke Kroeger, CJR on Fri 11 Mar 2011 at 05:28 AM