The Media as Watchdog

This 18-page document is about the renewed interest in “watchdogging” by the media caused by recent events and trends such as globalisation, the fall of authoritarian and socialist regimes, and the deregulation of the media worldwide. It examines the desirability of the watchdog role, its impact, and its dark side, as well as its relationship to government, the market, and the profession of journalism. The document is part of the publication of papers for a conference on “The Role of the News Media in the Governance Reform Agenda", which was co-sponsored by the World Bank Communication for Governance and Accountability Program (CommGAP) and the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at the John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Boston, United States (US).


The watchdog and government

According to this document, the conditions of democracy are necessary for an effective media role as watchdog: "the institutional arrangements of democracy provide the most hospitable environment for watchdog reporting. The constitutional and legal protections for a free press as well as access to government-held information give journalists not only the right, but also the tools with which to monitor government." It has taken root in the Balkans, for example, but not in Myanmar. With its turn to market liberalisation, China now has watchdog journalism, fuelled by profitability in the wake of government reductions in subsidies. In addition to political liberalisation, competitive media markets, and degrees of social and political ferment, journalistic and entrepreneurial agency is a factor, fostered by the protection of journalists from physical harm, jail, harassment through lawsuits, and restrictions on access to information.


The watchdog and the market:

The contradictory nature of the market is described as: "On one hand, market liberalization and competition have encouraged the emergence of, and in many places, also sustained, investigative reporting. But at the same time, market pressures are a major obstacle to its continued viability.” Where donor funding is available, non-profits sometimes take on the watchdog role. "They fill a gap in media systems where market, ownership, or political pressures make investigative reporting by commercial or state-owned media difficult if not impossible. These centers are involved in training and reporting and serve as models of excellence that are helping raise the standards of local journalism. Elsewhere, startup ventures by individual journalists are taking the lead in cutting-edge investigations. In Malaysia, the web-based news site Malaysiakini is filling the information gap in a country where the media are in the hands of the ruling party and its business allies. The site is funded partly by foundations and partly by subscribers." In the competitive market, the document emphasises that smaller and start-up media will take on the role of watchdogging if it makes them more competitive with established media. However, the rise of web-based citizen journalism and some non-profit efforts "changes the equation, if only because they do not factor in profits and competitive edge in their calculations."

The watchdog and the profession:

The role development of journalists as investigators proceeds differently in different cultural and political environments. Journalists redefine their roles in response to both institutional and economic changes as well as the expectations of their audiences. The professionalisation of the watchdog role (through training, organisations establishing standards, and the demand of a larger and more educated middle class) and its institutionalisation in newsrooms support a progression from partisan to professional watchdogging. "If this trajectory is the standard path of media development, then it could be argued that it would be futile for developing countries still in the earlier phases of the development arc to aspire for the kind of professional investigative reporting done in big newsrooms in North America and Western Europe. They would need to wait for the structures to evolve to make this kind of journalism the norm." However, the internet must be included in the landscape of journalistic development. Some websites are challenging the traditional professional norms, which may indicate a new step in the trajectory of this kind of journalism, "a sort of post-professionalization phase brought about by the different values and norms - as well as the different news imperative - that prevail in the online world". In China, for example, "the political bloggers take seriously their role as watchdogs of power, even if many of them remain Communist Party supporters." Changes and challenges to watchdog journalism indicate that "it could well be that the pre-eminence of the watchdogging ethos rises and ebbs over time, depending on the appetite of consumers", while journalism schools and press associations play a role in keeping the ethos alive by teaching investigative skills and standards to continue building the watchdogging tradition and providing models to emulate.

The watchdog’s impact

Proponents hope that this role for the media will support corruption control by exposing wrongdoing. However, in reality, though media may "make waves" through watchdogging, certain institutions are impervious to accountability. Factors governing effectiveness may include timing, prestige of the news organisation, the production values of the investigation, and the balance of political forces. The document cites evidence that "[t]he media may change public attitudes but they don’t necessarily mobilize the public to participate in political life. The press may be more influential in molding the attitude and behaviour of political elites, who are much more sensitive to how the media report on them." Thus, watchdog reporting may lead to reform if the political climate is ripe for reform. It may set off a cycle of media and government reforms by building media's credibility, educating citizens, and contributing to democratic discourse. "Such role is particularly important during democratic transitions, when the media are still asserting their autonomy from government and helping construct the new rules of engagement with officials."



Its dark side:

The contrarian view names the media watchdog role as a component of the “politics of permanent scandal”. It is suggested that transitional societies are more prone to the distortion of politics by opponent accusations of "uncleanness". Others feel that the exposure of scandals is a ritual absolution that cleanses public life. The outcomes of exposés are not certain - the press can also lose credibility; however, the tool of "watchdogging" can raise the level of discourse, engage the public, and contribute to reconstructing a public sphere. "It also keeps alive the most beloved of journalistic myths: that of the press as the guardian of the public interest. And that, in the end, may be the most enduring impact of watchdog journalism: it sustains the belief among both journalists and citizens that exposure and vigilance can check the abuses of power. It keeps the faith."