CLARK MOLLENHOFF AWARD FOR INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING

David Heath (right) accepts the 2008 Clark Mollenhoff Award for Excellence in Investigative Reporting from IPJ Director Joe Starrs.

The Clark Mollenhoff Award for Excellence in Investigative Reporting is named for the late Pulitzer-Prize winning reporter who conducted groundbreaking investigations into the influence of organized crime in American society. His work led to successful crackdowns on labor racketeering and Teamster Union corruption. Clark Mollenhoff was a professor of journalism at Washington and Lee University and was the director of the Institute on Political Journalism at the time of his death. (Mollenhoff biography)

The Mollenhoff Award for Investigative Reporting is given annually to the best newspaper or magazine story that conforms both to the definition of investigative reporting as originally defined by Investigative Reporters and Editors (IRE) and to the professional standards articulated by Clark Mollenhoff in his critiques of journalism craft. Recipients may be a newspaper reporter, team of reporters or an individual newspaper showing initiative similar to Mollenhoff's.

Investigative Elements:
It is the reporting, through one's own work product and initiative, matters of importance, which some persons or organizations wish to keep secret. The three basic elements are that the investigation be the work of the reporter, not the report of an investigation made by someone else; that the subject of the story involves something of reasonable importance to the reader or viewer and that others are attempting to hide these matters from the public.

1. Reporter's own work product: This means that the reporter must have initiated and done this investigation. It is permissible to use excerpts from police records, official investigations, etc. but only incidentally and not as primary proof of the investigative conclusion.

2. A Matter of Reasonable Importance: It should be a matter that substantially serves the public interest.

3. A Matter that Others are Attempting to Hide: This is the element that more than any other differentiates investigative reporting from depth and explanatory reporting. Corrupt politicians, for example, don't want people to know they are stealing, so they perform their corrupt acts in ways designed to avoid public discovery. The same applies to polluters, mobsters, price-gougers etc.

The following craft imperatives should be considered towards judging:

1. The story must effectively prove its investigative premise.

2. Anonymous sources rarely belong in investigative stories and their use should be strongly discouraged.

3. The story should be well written and clearly sourced.

4. Good packaging and graphics are desirable.

5. Strong results, while not always attainable, sometimes help validate investigative stories.

6. Since there is only one annual award, a light thumb on the scale should be awarded to smaller publications that produce strong investigative entries despite limited resources.

I, Kerri DiNarda, am the author of this document, The Fund for American Studies,and I release its contents under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later.