This workshop focuses on providing practical, instructional guidance for journalists aiming to conduct investigative reporting to international standards while avoiding common pitfalls.
The workshop is presented in two formats, both using the same source material from Media Helping Media. The first is a two-hour workshop designed for those who are already familiar with the topic but who would like to deepen their understanding. The second is a four-hour, half-day workshop for those who are new to the topic.
Trainers are invited to select the format that best meets the needs of those they are training. The source material for this workshop, which focuses on writing style and journalistic discipline, is investigative journalism best-practice. We recommend participants read the source material before attending the worshop.
Workshop outline 1: Two-hour session
(For trainees familiar with investigative journalism)
09:00–10:00 – Session 1: Refining research and ethical sourcing
- Aims: To review best-practice research methods; to deepen understanding of source verification; and to apply ethical standards when dealing with experts and sensitive information.
- Presentation: Trainer leads a quick recap on the importance of proper research (background, new developments, main players). Discuss the danger of losing focus in piles of material. Emphasise the need to always ‘spread your net wide’ to ensure balance. Trainer explains that sources, especially experts, often have an agenda and must be checked against their links (political, business) and previous statements.
- Activity: Trainees work in pairs on a short case study where a political poll and an expert source are introduced. They must identify three key areas to check for bias or motive. Groups report back, focusing on how to maintain impartiality when using such sources.
- Discussion: Trainer leads a debate on the ethical challenge of interviewing former officials (the ‘inside track’) versus current insiders. How do journalists ensure the source’s motive (why they left/spoke out) does not compromise the story’s objective?
10:00–10:45 – Session 2: Interview discipline and legal constraints
- Aims: To reinforce best-practice interview techniques (questioning and listening) and to ensure awareness of legal and security pitfalls.
- Presentation: Trainer outlines key interview discipline: taking notes even when recording (as a back-up and to force listening); saving all notes and recordings until after publication; the risk of ‘leading questions’ (subtly prompting a specific answer); and the value of asking open-ended questions (allowing the interviewee to speak freely). Trainer then covers legal and security pitfalls, including the illegality of covert recording or phone taps in some countries. Undercover work is defined as concealing identity, and the trainer highlights the ethical test: vital public interest must outweigh deception and potential violations of privacy. This is crucial for professional integrity.
- Activity: Trainer provides three examples of poor, closed, or leading questions. Trainees rewrite them into short, precise, open-ended questions, then practice them in quick role-play scenarios. This tests active listening, as trainees must adapt if the answer shifts the focus.
- Discussion: Group discussion on the ‘on-the-record’ versus ‘off-the-record’ challenge. Why is it important to confirm informed consent multiple times, especially if details could put the source at risk? Discuss the risks of using anonymous sources and the need to be specific about the source’s relationship to the issue (e.g., ‘a senior UN official’ rather than just ‘a diplomat’).
10:45–11:00 – Assignment
- See Assignment section at the foot of this page.
Workshop outline 2: Four-hour session
(For trainees new to the topic)
09:00–10:00 – Session 1: The foundations of investigation: Research and focusing the story
- Aims: To establish the necessity of rigorous pre-interview research and to teach trainees how to identify and verify official documents and external reports.
- Presentation: Trainer explains that investigative journalism aims for international standards and requires thorough preparation to maintain credibility. Proper research provides focus and informs interview questions. Explain what official documents are (e.g., court documents, meeting minutes, financial records). Trainer details how to check sources like opinion polls (checking methodology and commissioning organisation) and NGOs (checking their motives and agenda).
- Activity: Trainees are given a fictional scenario of a potential corruption story. They must work in small groups to compile a checklist of 10 different types of documents (official or external reports) they would seek out before starting interviews. The trainer circulates to check that trainees know when to stop researching and start interviewing – focusing on the ‘new angle‘ the story will offer.
- Discussion: Group sharing of research checklists. Trainer leads a discussion on how to spot potential bias in commissioned reports and why it is vital to represent the interests of all different groups (spreading the net wide) to ensure fairness.
10:00–11:00 – Session 2: Interviewing techniques and vulnerable subjects
- Aims: To master effective, precise questioning techniques and to develop the required sensitivity and ethics for interviewing vulnerable individuals.
- Presentation: Trainer teaches the core rules: in-person preferred, phone second, email last (and if used, state it clearly). Explain the importance of not asking ‘leading questions’ (a question that suggests its own answer) and using ‘open-ended questions’ (a question requiring a detailed answer, not just ‘yes’ or ‘no’). Detail the procedure for interviewing trauma victims (secure place, trusted person, respect refusal) and children (parent/guardian permission, child-friendly style, protecting the child from harm). Explain that for minors in court cases, journalists must be extremely careful to avoid contempt of court (disobeying court rules, which can lead to punishment). Maintaining privacy is the overriding concern.
- Activity: Mock interview role-play. Trainees pair up. One is the journalist, the other is an ‘evasive official’ or ‘victim advocate’. The journalist must use the ‘Who else should I speak to?’ and ‘What have I not asked you?’ questions, and practice ending the interview with a quick notes check and an informal chat (recorder off).
- Discussion: Discussion focuses on scheduling. Why must ‘tricky’ or potentially hostile governmental interviews be scheduled last? (Answer: To ensure the journalist is fully prepared and has all other evidence ready to challenge evasive remarks).
11:00-11:15 – Break
11:15–12:45 – Session 3: Ethical constraints, safety, and writing structure
- Aims: To understand and adhere to strict professional ethical codes regarding payment, quotes, legality, and reporting tone, and to structure the final article effectively.
- Presentation: Trainer stresses the non-negotiable rules: never pay for information; never make up a quote. Discuss going undercover and the strict ethical questions (public interest vs. deception) that must be answered first. Review physical and digital security: secure storage of sensitive files, caution with mobile phones/email (as they can be tapped), and having a detailed check-in plan with the editor. Trainer introduces the basic writing structure: beginning (intro), middle (body), end (conclusion). Emphasise that the intro must grab attention, and the body must build the argument logically using linking words. Crucially, discuss avoiding ‘emotive words‘ (adjectives like vicious, brutal that reveal the journalist’s opinion or bias) and sensationalism. Using temperate language ensures accuracy and avoids causing undue offence.
- Activity: Trainees analyse two paragraphs provided by the trainer – one using heavy, emotive language and one reporting the facts temperately. They must highlight the emotive words and rewrite the paragraph to maintain accuracy and professional distance. Groups then draft a simple ‘roadmap’ outline for a story, ensuring the conclusion does not introduce any new information.
- Discussion: Trainer leads a discussion on the role of the journalist as an observer: spectators at the match, not supporters. Discuss how emotive language and not avoiding bias can compromise the journalist’s ability to maintain a professional distance, damaging credibility.
12:45–13:00 – Assignment
Final assignment: Investigative checklist and outline creation
Participants must select a complex, ongoing local issue they wish to investigate.
- Draft a research checklist: Create a step-by-step plan detailing five different types of official documents they would need to see to ensure accuracy.
- Identify key sources: List three people they would interview (e.g., expert, victim, official) and detail the one most challenging question they would ask each, ensuring the questions are open-ended and precise.
- Draft the outline: Create a detailed article outline (roadmap) with a clear, attention-grabbing introductory sentence (the ‘lead’) and headings for the body paragraphs that follow a logical flow (beginning, middle, end).
Materials needed for the workshop
- Handouts summarising interview types and essentials.
- Example interview transcripts.
- Research resources (internet or printouts).
- Recording devices (optional, for mock interviews).
- Handouts with examples of emotive vs. temperate language.
Assessment
(Both workshops)
- Participation in discussions and activities.
- Quality of drafted questions and peer feedback.
- Performance in mock interviews and reflection.
- Quality of the final investigative checklist and article outline.
Conclusion
This workshop focused on providing practical, instructional guidance for journalists aiming to conduct investigative reporting to international standards while avoiding common pitfalls. We covered the rigorous requirements for research, the necessity of source verification, best-practice interview techniques (especially with vulnerable subjects), and the essential adherence to legal and ethics. Crucially, the sessions addressed security for both the journalist and the material, and the discipline required for structuring and writing a complex narrative using temperate language. For further reading and reference on these practices, the source material is available here: investigative journalism best-practice.
