This is a CCTV image of the armed robbery that took place Sunday 23rd November 2008 at the Spar on Albany rd., Falmouth.
The Friday before, The Woodlane Social, also in Falmouth was robbed by an hooded criminal brandishing a baseball bat. Both of these establishments are on my doorstep.
So the logical thing, was to try and find out what is going on. This led me to making a short package on serious crime and media manipulation.
the investigation
I spoke to Odette Sharp, the young girl who was working late that Sunday night. As a victim of an alleged firearm assault, how did she feel?- How does she feel now about overall crime in Falmouth? did this event give her a skewed view of how things really are?
I also contacted Devon and Cornwall Police and spoke to the senior explosives and firearms clerk to get an idea about who owns guns, what punishments and measures are in place to deter illegal gun trading and to find out whether the perception we have of firearms is correct.
I then took to the streets for some vox pops and asked the public what they’re views are on the subject because I wanted to know how this event affected the community and whether the way the media handled violent crime influenced the way they thought.
investigating crime
By own admission, my 1:30 audio piece was hardly comprehensive and I dare not use the term exhaustive.
It is good practice before an investigation is commissioned and before seeking editorial approval and legal advice to consider the following:
- background and motivation of sources.
- justification for using deception, undercover work or secret recording to gather further evidence.
- whether this is the only way to proceed.
- possible consequences of our actions.
I did a bit of background research after I had done my piece and the set of codes of conduct above came up. These are are from the BBC website and I am therefore assuming they are accepted industry-wide, as good-practice guidelines.
Though the middle points did not really apply to my ‘investigation’ – when it comes to my packages, this is still something of a tenuous term- it did get me thinking about how we ‘package’ information and present it to the public. What is my agenda? what is my source’s motivation for divulging information? are they giving me a factual account of the situation? and what is my audience feeling after hearing the piece. Did they think it was balanced?, did I shine new light on gun crime/its perception?
Unfortunately I do not have clearance to make the audio publicly available, but in future I’d like to try and adhere to the above guidelines and float these questions, to really get me thinking about the piece, and what it is actually about. I will try and put a good-practice checklist before my next assignment and see how much of it I can stick to and where discrepancies occur in practice.
the law
My understanding of investigative journalism so far, is that it will involve defamation, whistle-blowing and maybe curtailing the law if necessary, in the name of public interest. So a good understanding of the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998, Reynold’s Defense, Human Rights Articles and their derogations (particularly 6, 8 & 10) and an overall basic understanding of how legal frameworks affect reporters, is vital.
I am also looking forward to considering absolute/ qualified privilege and what balanced, accurate and contemporaneous journalism means.
Hi Michela, I liked this post, but one question – why weren’t you able to publish the piece you did? Also, it feels like you went the distance and asked some interesting questions of people – a recent victim of crime, the police, and the public – but then you havn’t told us what they have said. You’re humble fans (I include myself) are left wanting more.