"If your Mother says she loves you, check it out"

As I am undertaking investigative journalism as a subject next semester, I found myself anticipating this lecture as somewhat of an introductory session; one I felt required my attention not simply because I would need to later write a summary of it. I'm not entirely sure what I envisioned our lecture on investigative journalism would be like, but I didn't expect it to be what it was. Not that the lecture wasn't interesting, I just felt it wasn't overly informative. Alas, a blog post is required.

The format was fairly straightforward, various quotes and definitions spinning a fairly easy to grasp concept of what investigative journalism was ultimately all about. Though as I alluded to previously, it felt markedly shallow, however there were a number of points that did pique my interest.

An investigative requirement

This was the first time I had heard the term "Shoe Leather Journalism". While being a rather easy term to understand, I felt those three words were a greater summation of investigative journalism than any I had heard prior. Because when you remove the onion layer of ambiguity formed by 'expert' definition upon 'expert' definition, investigative journalism is quite simply leaving the desk and computer behind, and physically seeking answers through self-interaction. While perhaps not overly compelling to some, I found humour in its simplicity. 

Another topic I found interesting were Bruce's slides on investigative 'trailblazers'. Of specific note, his comments surrounding W. T. Stead's influence on the people trafficking industry in the late 19th century. In a case almost perfectly suited to the saying "the end justifies the means", Stead was arrested for his involvement in the attempted procurement of a young girl for sex that was orchestrated by he and the Salvos as a way of bringing police attention to the matter, and by doing so also raised the legal age of consent from 12 to 16. 

Stories like these are what I look for as inspiration to becoming a journalist. In an industry renowned for bad reputations, where it's considered by many as almost an obligation to despise us, the ability to physically change circumstances for the better is something that generates a sense of hope. Despite my previous misgivings regarding the content of the lecture, I believe it to be very effective in that sense. Surprisingly so, I am now looking forward to next semester. Bring on JOUR1710!

Now all I need are some leather shoes...

(Apologies for the last two posts being out of order, I wasn't able to attend this lecture and have therefore only recently caught it up)