Abstract: The lack of a precise definition of investigative journalism has led to confusion regarding its nature in relation to traditional journalism. Proponents of the view that fundamental differences exist between the two fields argue that investigative journalism is more closely aligned with scientific research than conventional reporting. This is because investigative journalism operates within specific controls, uses specialised tools and methodologies to verify facts, and evaluates the scale and impact of the issues being investigated. This study adopts a comparative approach to assess the validity of this hypothesis by identifying key differences between traditional and investigative journalism, and by exploring the role of scientific research methods and techniques in shaping investigative journalism. The central research question is: To what extent do investigative journalists rely on scientific research methods to craft their stories, and how do these methods reinforce the principles of investigative journalism, contributing to its distinctiveness? The findings reveal significant similarities between investigative reporting and scientific research. However, it is important not to overstate this resemblance. Ultimately, investigative reporting is a journalistic “product” designed to meet the demands of the profession, not a purely scientific endeavour. Nevertheless, it distinguishes itself from other forms of journalism due to its innovative use of scientific research tools, which closely align with the methods employed in investigative journalism. Keywords: Scientific Research, Investigative Journalism, Research Methods, Specialised Journalism, Media Colleges.
Made with FlippingBook Online newsletter