Opinion

  Home  

  About Us  

  Contact Us 

  Subscribe     Advertise  
  Archives     Feedback  

  Register  

  Help  

  Special Report

  Top Stories

  Opinion

  World

  Weekend

  Sports

  Career Times

  Property & 
   Home

 
 
 

Sunday, June 15, 2008

 

ONE MAN’S MEAT
By Benjamin G. Defensor
Muckraking and attack dogs

 
WHAT we now know as investigative journalism used to be known as muckraking. Muckraking was a pejorative word adapted from Paul Bunyan’s Pilgrims Progress by United States President Theodore Roosevelt and first applied to magazine articles exposing corruption in business and government.

Today, muckraking takes the shape of watchdog journalism, a special aspect of interpretive reporting, although both are considered synonymous. Giving warning is the main task of a watchdog. Although watchdogs may be trained to be attack dogs, watchdog journalism basically warns against dangers to freedom, property and other rights guaranteed in a democracy. This goes with the contemporary definition of the function of journalism as providing information for a free society.

However watchdogs trained as attack dogs could be, and have been, employed by vested interests against journalists. And the irony of it all is that they operate within media itself and it takes a sharp sense to detect a watchdog from an attack dog.

Today, watchdog journalism is the major preoccupation in the United States, our model in journalistic—and media—activity. The Spring issue of the Nieman Reports of Harvard University’s Nieman Foundation for Journalism is dedicated to the 21st century journalists. And probably one of our achievements in journalism is the fact that a Filipino journalist, Sheila S. Coronel, is a director of the Stabile Center for Investigative Journalism at the Graduate School of Journalism at Columbia University.

Sheila was a co-founder of the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ), which has become a unique and major journalism institution. At first it was considered a “wire agency” for investigative stories. The PCIJ was a challenge to some editors who saw that major journalistic projects, usually those that require a series of in-depth articles, should be one of the tasks of a newspaper. Having to share “agency” stories was just unimaginable at a time when exclusives and scoops still reigned as the hallmarks of a top newspaper.

But when PCIJ articles used by client publications won major prizes in the J.V.Ongpin Investigative Journalism Awards, editors and publishers took notice. And instead of looking at PCIJ as a competitor, accepted it as an ally. For the publication shares in the glory won by a PCIJ report.

In her article in the Nieman Reports issue on muckraking, Sheila writes:

“PCIJ’s initial stories were about places . . . that have fallen off the news map and were rarely visited by journalists. We sent reporters across the islands to investigative logging and published a series linking the large-scale destruction of forests not only to natural disasters but also to the power of logging lords, many of whom had been elected to the freshly minted Congress.

“As we racheted up the depth and breadth of our reporting, we saw the impact of muckraking: Several members of the Cabinet, a Supreme Court justice, and assorted bureaucrats resigned because of PCIJ’s exposes. Investigations had been initiated because of the wrongdoings we have uncovered.”

But the fattest cat of them all was the systematic exposes of the corruption, drinking, and womanizing of Joseph Estrada, President of the Philippines. As Sheila put it:

“Estrada a flamboyant former movie star . . . was a scandal waiting to happen. He had five wives. He was also a gambler with a taste for high-priced French wine. We heard he was deeply corrupt as well and so formed a team to ferret out his wealth.

“In the course of a year, we uncovered the companies he and his wives had formed to set up businesses and found the dozen or so fabulous mansions he was building for them. We found he had acquired $40 million of real estate after just two years in office and unmasked the dummy companies that fronted for the purchases. We proved that there was no way Estrada could legitimately account for his acquisitions.”

Estrada was charged with and convicted of plunder. But before he could serve his term, which could mean his being behind bars for life, he was pardoned by President Arroyo.

opinion@manilatimes.net

   
 

Sponsored Links
 

Back To Top

 
 
 


Powered by: 
The Manila Times Web Admin.

  

Home | About Us | Contact | Subscribe | Advertise | Feedback | Archives | Help

Copyright (c) 2001 The Manila Times | Terms of Service
The Manila Times Publishing Corp. All rights reserved.

Hosted by: