Is James O’Keefe a “journalist”? Does it matter? Do the political goals of an undercover reporter—or activist—affect the value of the truths he or she reveals? How does a hidden camera compare to a faked identity, when there’s a story to be told? What are the “best practices for undercover” reporting—or are there any?
In CJR’s latest podcast, assistant editor Joel Meares speaks with Brooke Kroeger, director of the Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute at New York University to explore some of these questions. Kroeger is the author of a biography of Nellie Bly, and has become somewhat of an expert on American journalism’s long history of undercover reporting. She recently previewed a database archive of such stories, which grew out of an upcoming book entitled Undercover Reporting: The Truth about Deception.
In this conversation, Kroeger argues that undercover reporting is incredibly valuable for its power to reveal truths and affect reform in our society, and that it should not be dismissed by the more traditional journalistic community; just look at the results, she says. In fact, she points out, mainstream news outlets have often partnered with advocacy groups to do this kind of work, all throughout the history of journalism in the US.
Listen to the episode below, and be sure to check out the CJR podcast homepage on iTunes, where you can listen to past episodes and subscribe for free.
http://www.amazon.com/Shure-Popper-Stopper-Gooseneck-Microphone/dp/B0006OCG20
#1 Posted by Dan A., CJR on Tue 15 Mar 2011 at 04:37 PM
1) O'Keefe only "investigates" 1) negative things, 2) about Democrats. If he is a "journalist" he certainly is not an "objective" one. A real "journalist" would be offended by O'Keefe's limited range. In order to honestly understand the world, you'd need a Democratic O'Keefe...and some O'Keefes that look for positive news.
2) A "take-down" isn't a real story, it is a smear. It is a take-down.
-- Little Davey, not a journalist
#2 Posted by Little Davey, CJR on Wed 16 Mar 2011 at 04:56 AM
There is a considerable distinction between reporting the news and making up the news.
In the case of the Mirage Bar in Chicago, 1979, the team of reporters, who wanted to document information on the need to pay off inspectors rented s bar. They let the inspectors come to them. The series didn't offer bribes to inspectors,but reported them to authorities.
In the Abscam case, Mel Weinberg, a convicted criminal worked with the FBI to lure Congressmen into an illegal situation.
The Abscam case was ths subject of a fierce debate between Robert w. Greene, author of The Sing Man, who defended Abscam, and Jack Anderson who found fault with the government creating crime. The tape is quite interesting.
Some interesting ethical question. I am white. If I and a women of color posed as a couple and tried to find housing, would we get different housing then if I went with my white wife?
If a drug clinic passes out drugs with no proper protocol, should congressional investigators pose as patients to check it out?
For these and other good quesitons, read Sissella Bok's work, Lying, Moral choices in Public and Private life. An honest look at dishonesty.
#3 Posted by David Reno, CJR on Fri 18 Mar 2011 at 03:09 PM
I don't automatically object to undercover journalism.It certainly can be revealing. Howevver, I can't believe anyone could call what O'Keefe does "journalism." Nothing he has ever revealed has been shown as truthful when his unedited tapes have been examined. Even Beck's website exposed O'Keefe's creative editing on the NPR tape. If what O'Keefe was doing was exposing the truth, he would not need to do creative editing.
He should not be embraced by the media but exposed and repudiated by the media because to call him "journalist" and defend his methods taints the media and creates distrust.
#4 Posted by Sandy, CJR on Wed 23 Mar 2011 at 02:37 PM