WHEN readers are asked what they want more of in newspapers the answer is often great, jaw-dropping scoops. Yet investigative reporting - the discipline behind many such stories - is increasingly seen by many newspaper executives as too expensive to bother with.
This is certainly the view of Professor Hans Kochler, the former UN monitor of the Lockerbie trial, who has attacked the Scottish media for its coverage of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi's continuing appeals against his conviction.
Kochler believes Scottish journalists are becoming unwilling to question the establishment version of events and work under editors and executives who refuse to finance proper reporting. He says he has a list of publications and journalists he believes have failed to do their jobs properly, which he may seek to publish at a later date.
Says Kochler: "As far as Lockerbie is concerned I can't understand why more isn't being done by the European country that was most concerned with it. There is a lot at stake: the rule of law, security, the role of international terrorism. Why isn't somebody trying to find out why the authorities are now trying to withhold evidence and delaying everything?"
In an earlier letter to veteran campaigner Robbie the Pict nee Brian Robertson, in which Kochler raised the issue of a potential media blackout, he simply wrote: "Where are Scotland's investigative journalists?"
Kochler claims that editors reduced coverage under establishment pressure. Some journalists closely related to the story argue that the real reason why Lockerbie is off the agenda is because people are tired of it, but Kochler claims it is a symptom of a wider problem that cuts across the profession.
Eamonn O'Neill, an experienced investigative journalist and the head of the University of Strathclyde's masters in the discipline, says that in the age of amateur bloggers, investigative reporting is the one area where news organisations of all kinds can differentiate themselves and build the kind of brand values that will allow them to prosper.
"They can make money out of it. The people who read good investigations have more disposable income and that can be attractive to advertisers," he says.
O'Neill, who has worked for all the main UK broadsheets and most famously secured the release of Robert Brown, who was wrongly convicted of murder, says Amercian papers, such as the New York Times, are investing more heavily in investigative work.
He points to the example of the Elliott Spitzer story, where the former governor of New York's links to a high-class prostitute were exposed.
"UK papers are starting to catch on to this," O'Neill adds.
A quick look at the papers suggests there is some way to go yet. The off-diary investigative teams of journalistic legend - most famously the Sunday Times Insight team who revealed the thalidomide scandal - are notable by their absence.
In Scotland there are no dedicated investigative teams nowadays, although most papers, especially the Sundays, will allow reporters to go off-diary if they can convince their editors they are onto something interesting. This has resulted in some notable stories including, according to O'Neill, the "forensic" work done by Sunday Herald Scottish political editor Paul Hutcheon when he broke the undeclared donations story that eventually led to Wendy Alexander's resignation.
The resources available are small, however. It's a far cry from the experiences of Peter Hounam, the former Sunday Times investigative reporter, who with his 1986 interview with nuclear engineer Mordechai Vanunu revealed the existence of Israel's nuclear weapons (although his achievement was admittedly tainted by bad planning by executives that contributed to Vanunu's subsequent arrest and 18 years' imprisonment in his home country).
Hounam, who has now retired to a chocolate-making business in Aberfeldy and is writing a book about investigative journalism, remembers: "If I thought there was a story on the other side of the world then I would get on a plane and just go and do it. I'm sure there would have to be a lot of meetings with accountants before that could happen now."
Where newspapers feel too commercially constrained to invest, the BBC is using the licence fee to forge ahead.
BBC lifer Marcus Ryder was appointed head of BBC Scotland's investigative unit in September last year. He has a 17-strong investigative team to work with at Pacific Quay, producing radio and television, including an increasing number of episodes of Panorama.
Ryder is adamant that investigative work is crucial to all journalism, across all Scottish media types. He says the key to success is the people: "It's all to do with talent. If you invest in journalists then you get good stories."
But former Harry Reid, the former Herald editor and author of Deadline: A History Of The Scottish Press, warns against too much hype. He says the history of investigative journalism is filled with teams who failed to come up with enough scoops to justify their existence and succeeded only in annoying colleagues by being a "newspaper within a newspaper".
"When I was at the Sunday Standard the defunct liberal broadsheet we had an investigative team made up of Roddy Forsyth, George Hulme and David Scott. All great journalists but, for some reason or another, they did not produce one outstanding story," he says.
While this may be fair comment, few would argue that Scottish journalism is ill-equipped to dig out the juiciest stories in the country. Time will tell whether O'Neill's hints of a revival see newspaper executives making any more money available.
"If that were to happen, it might go part of the way to improving everyone's opinion of journalism," he says.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article