Forensic journalism

DEFINITION: Collection and dissemination of factual information regarding crimes and other events through mass-communication avenues, including newspapers, magazines, television, radio, and websites.

SIGNIFICANCE: Members of the public gain most of their information about forensic evidence and the forensic techniques used to solve crimes through the mass news media as well as through fictional depictions. In addition, practitioners of forensic journalism sometimes use techniques similar to those used by forensic scientists to uncover evidence of crimes that may lead to investigation by law-enforcement officials.

Although information about forensic science and the legal system was widely available online and through various podcasts in the twenty-first century, for some members of the American public, the journalistic media remained sources of factual information on those subjects. Unlike fictionalized accounts, which often glamorize forensic endeavors and exaggerate the capabilities of forensic experts and technologies, good journalism has the power to educate the public on the role the of forensic sciences in the legal system.

The press in all its forms—whether reporting in newspapers or magazines, on television or radio, or through Internet news outlets—serves an important purpose within the American legal system. The so-called Fourth Estate keeps the public informed and provides oversight of government entities, including the legal system. The news media often serve as the front line in identifying issues and events that may require legal intervention. Through a process commonly known as investigative reporting or criminal justice reporting, journalists frequently use techniques similar to those employed by forensic specialists to dig for the truth. In fact, reporters who engage in investigative journalism are increasingly becoming known as forensic journalists, and many university journalism schools have initiated classes devoted to instruction in specific forensic techniques that can be used in investigative reporting.

Depictions of Forensics

Until the 1990s, mainstream journalism frequently shied away from detailed depictions of the forensic sciences. Deeming such information gruesome or exploitative, most media outlets reported on the results of forensic investigations rather than on the actual techniques employed in such investigations. The public, however, has held a fascination for the forensic sciences dating back to well before Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s fictional character Sherlock Holmes employed such techniques so compellingly. Beyond fictional accounts, the forensic sciences were often relegated to the pages of tabloid newspapers and magazines, which frequently emphasized the most gruesome aspects of the field and ignored the sometimes tedious science behind forensic endeavors.

During the 1990s, however, a single case catapulted to the forefront of many journalistic endeavors in the United States. The 1994 slaying of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman, and the subsequent trial of Nicole’s ex-husband, former football star O. J. Simpson, spurred intense media scrutiny that captured the attention of the nation. In fact, the O. J. Simpson trial remains the most publicized in American history, thanks to the extensive, often minute-by-minute, coverage provided by both broadcast and print media.

Although many media outlets were castigated for sensationalizing the trial, the public appeared to have an insatiable appetite for even the tiniest shreds of information, and the forensic sciences employed by both the prosecution and the defense were almost as much stars as the himself. The public reveled in the minutiae of DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) evidence, footprint and fingerprint analyses, analyses of hair and fiber samples, and computer re-creations of the murders, and the media gave the public what it wanted. By providing complete coverage of the trial, including detailed presentations of forensic evidence, the media, in a sense, placed viewers and readers in the jurors’ box. In the end, possible contamination of by forensic investigators was a key element of Simpson’s acquittal.

If the O. J. Simpson case brought forensic science—and its fallibility—to the forefront of journalistic interest, a second case in 1996 solidified this interest. The mystery of the JonBenét Ramsey murder case began the morning after Christmas Day, 1996, when the six-year-old was found strangled in the basement of her family’s sprawling home in Boulder, Colorado. After an initial outpouring of sympathy for JonBenét’s parents, John and Patsy Ramsey, the wealthy businessman and his socialite wife soon fell under suspicion. Despite an abundance of forensic evidence, including an extensively reviewed autopsy, blood and fiber samples, possible semen, footprint casts, and a handwritten ransom note, the case remains unsolved.

Although a trial never occurred, the media provided extensive coverage of the analysis of the forensic evidence, noting, for example, that handwriting experts could not rule out Patsy Ramsey as a possible author of the ransom note. In addition to devoting newspaper and magazine articles and television reports specifically to the forensic analysis of the evidence, the media also severely criticized the Boulder Department for not securing the properly and for poor collection of the evidence.

Other high-profile cases followed. The 2002 abduction and grisly murder of Laci Peterson and her unborn child and the 2005 of serial killer Dennis Rader, known as the BTK (bind, torture, and kill) killer, helped thrust the forensic sciences into the limelight. The September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York City and the Pentagon also resulted in significant reporting on forensic techniques as experts tried to identify victims and analyze structural failures that led to the destruction of the World Trade Center’s twin towers.

Although such coverage often provides a window into the world of the forensic sciences, constraints on time or column space frequently lead to attenuated depictions of the actual processes involved in investigating legal issues, leaving the public with less-than-accurate perceptions of this field. Critics charge that the news media tend to misrepresent the forensic sciences as being used more ubiquitously and as more effective and reliable than can realistically be expected. Also, they assert that journalists often represent forensic support as more easily accessible than it actually is. Among the most frequent criticisms is that both journalistic and fictional depictions of the forensic sciences paint a far more glamorous and fast-paced picture of the field than is true in real life.

Impacts of Depictions

Although much of the interest in forensic science in the early years of the twenty-first century has been attributed to the glut of television crime investigation dramas, the genesis of these shows can actually be traced back to journalistic depictions of forensics associated with high-profile cases of the 1990s. When the entertainment industry recognized the public’s fascination with the details of the O. J. Simpson case, for example, it was an easy call to turn that interest into profitable fiction. The industry, however, first tested the waters with more documentary-style real-life crime dramas, such as Court TV’s Forensic Files, which straddled the line between journalism and entertainment. After it became apparent that such programming could pique consumers’ interest, a variety of fictionalized dramas featuring forensics, including Cold Case and the three series in the CSI franchise, soon followed.

The impacts of fictionalized and journalistic depictions of the forensic sciences were both positive and negative. On one hand, they publicized a previously obscure field, spurring interest and provoking a surge in enrollment in university forensic courses. On the other hand, they frequently presented a skewed or inadequate picture of the field that, according to some critics, significantly affected the ability of the legal community to prosecute criminals. Many criminologists came to decry the “CSI effect,” asserting that because of the fictional depiction of forensic science in program such as CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, juries expect and even demand increasing amounts of on expensive, time-consuming, and often unnecessary forensic analyses in order to opt for conviction of suspects.

Journalism as Forensics

Journalism has always had a forensic element to it. Often known as investigative journalism or investigative reporting, forensic journalism has played an increasing role in ferreting out legal breaches, and the reporters who practice this form of journalism frequently employ many of the same techniques used by forensic professionals.

Forensic journalism came to the public’s attention most dramatically in the 1970s. Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward were young reporters for The Washington Post investigating a break-in at the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in the Watergate Hotel, Washington, DC. Five men in business suits and surgical gloves had been arrested with illegal bugging devices. The reporters’ investigation eventually led to the White House and, some experts claim, the resignation of President Richard M. Nixon in 1974. Bernstein and Woodward’s book All the President’s Men (1974), and the film based on the book, recounted the reporters’ investigative efforts, from utilizing confidential informants to identifying accounting discrepancies related to improper use of campaign funds. Since that time, the work of investigative journalists has led to literally thousands of legal cases, involving everything from local scandals to national and international events.

In the twenty-first century, forensic reporters have been at the forefront of several scandals involving athletes who had allegedly taken performance-enhancing drugs. In Canada, Toronto Star reporter Harold Levy was honored in 2006 for a series of investigative stories that led to a review of child autopsies in forty-four cases of and suspicious death. As a result of Levy’s investigations, a forensic pathologist was sanctioned for sloppy work that may have allowed perpetrators to go free and an innocent man who had been accused of killing his niece was released.

Forensic journalists are likely to seek the assistance of forensic accountants, computer experts, and laboratories in identifying possible leads. The rise of the Internet has been a boon to many investigative reporters, allowing them to cut their research time significantly. In fact, a new field known as computer-assisted reporting, or CAR, is growing rapidly.

Forensic journalism investigations often require months or even years of research to produce what are commonly known as exposés, which may be disseminated to the public in print, audio, or video form. Journalists may work in conjunction with law-enforcement officials or go outside official channels. Unlike the glamorous depictions of investigative or forensic journalists in fictional movies and television programs, real-life reporters often work grueling hours with little credit. In 2006, the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) launched a documentary series on investigative journalism called Exposé: America’s Investigative Reports. The series highlights the work of journalists who might otherwise remain in the shadows.

Unlike law-enforcement officials who are conducting investigations, forensic journalists have no authority to compel witnesses to testify or to compel sources to produce evidence of crimes. Instead, they must rely on others, as well as their own ingenuity, to discover the truth. Often, a key element of their ability to discover the veracity of claims is their lack of connection to law-enforcement officials. Journalists have traditionally kept their sources of information and evidence secret, although that practice has often been challenged in court and some journalists have gone to jail rather than reveal their sources.

Beyond disclosure of sources, investigative journalism raises other pointed questions regarding ethics. Because journalists have few tools to compel witnesses to speak or to demand production of evidence, some have resorted to debatable tactics to discover the facts of the cases they are investigating. Tactics such as the use of hidden cameras, false identities, and other deceptions raise important issues regarding the privacy of innocent or even guilty parties and the legality of such techniques. These issues have often led to litigation—a common concern for reporters and news media executives alike.

Many experts have asserted that in the early twenty-first century investigative reporting is being undertaken with decreasing frequency because of limited financial resources and a media system controlled by major conglomerates, which may squelch the kind of time- and labor-intensive research such reporting requires. Further, such large organizations may be especially sensitive to the legal issues and potential costs of litigation associated with investigative reporting. Many journalism experts have expressed the fear that such reporting will eventually be relegated exclusively to tabloid newspapers and television shows that may sensationalize stories rather than report objectively.

Training in Forensic Journalism

Many colleges and universities in the United States offer courses specifically in forensic or investigative journalism techniques. Such training provides practitioners with a working knowledge of the skills they need to conduct in-depth research into events and issues. A wide array of expertise is often required to produce comprehensive, well-documented articles or broadcast reports. Practitioners frequently must work not only with other reporters and editors, but also with legal specialists, accountants, statistical analysts, librarians, and news researchers. Forensic journalists must also be keenly aware of libel laws, public information access rules such as the Freedom of Information Act, and other pertinent directives. Competent journalism schools help students learn to navigate business, government, and legal systems to uncover information that may otherwise go unnoticed by the public.

Some journalism schools have themselves been involved in cracking real cases, setting wrongfully convicted prisoners free by discovering and publicizing new evidence or by reexamining old evidence using forensic techniques that were unavailable at the time the cases were tried. Among the most spectacular of these interventions was the case of Illinois death row inmate Anthony Porter. Porter, with an IQ of just 51, had been convicted in the brutal 1982 murder of a young couple. With the help of a private investigator, a journalism class at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, began to reinvestigate the case. The students examined court records, tracked down witnesses, and reconstructed the crime. Their work implicated another man in the murders, and Porter was exonerated just two days before he was scheduled to be executed. What made this case even more compelling was that eventually another twelve people on death row in Illinois were found to be innocent. As a result, the state’s governor commuted the executions of all death row inmates.

Although not considered a forensic science, the field of journalism contributes to and profoundly affects the practice of forensics and has the power to develop an initial foundation for official forensic investigation of potential wrongdoing. With proper training and experience, forensic reporters serve as an important part of the legal process by spotlighting possible violations of the law and by educating the public on the processes involved in official investigations of criminal activities.

For example, on January 6, 2021, hundreds of supporters of President Donald Trump, angry that he had lost the 2020 election, stormed the US Capitol building in Washington as the election results were being certified. In the wake of the riots, the FBI, Capitol Police, and other law enforcement agencies used video recorded from cell phones, television cameras, and other media sources to identify, track down, and eventually arrest many of those who took part.

In the twenty-first century, some journalists have permanently shifted their focus to investigating and documenting crimes and criminal activity cases. While some still do work for newspapers, TV networks, and other legacy media, many of these so called “true crime” reporters often publish their work as a nonfiction book or may report their findings through a web series or a podcast.

Bibliography

Aucoin, James L. The Evolution of American Investigative Journalism. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2007.

Bernstein, Carl, and Bob Woodward. All the President’s Men, 1974, 40th anniversary ed., Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 2014.

De Burgh, Hugo, ed. Investigative Journalism: Context and Practice 2d ed., Taylor and Francis, 2013.

Gibbs, Cheryl, and Tom Warhover. Getting the Whole Story: Reporting and Writing the News. New York: Guilford Press, 2002.

Gray, Jillian. "The True Crime Genre Is Popular, but Is It Ethical?" University of Oregon, 28 Aug. 2023, journalism.uoregon.edu/news/true-crime-genre-ethics. Accessed 15 Aug. 2024.

Houston, Brant, Len Bruzzese, and Steve Weinberg, eds. The Investigative Reporter’s Handbook: A Guide to Documents, Databases and Techniques. 5th ed., Bedford/St. Martin’s Press, 2009.

Gates, Kelly. "Day of Rage: Forensic Journalism and the US Capitol Riot." Sage Journals, vol. 46, no. 1, 24 July 2023, doi.org/10.1177/01634437231188449. Accessed 20 Aug. 2024.

Lee, Henry C., with Thomas W. O’Neil. Cracking More Cases: The Forensic Science of Solving Crimes. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 2004.

Schiller, Lawrence. Perfect Murder, Perfect Town. New York: HarperCollins, 1999.

Shapiro, Bruce, ed. Shaking the Foundations: Two Hundred Years of Investigative Journalism in America.New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press. 2003.