Story-telling and Evidence-giving: How?

March 11, 2023 2:15 AM

I’m trying to pass on a tip to an investigative reporter about a major corruption case. I have learned how to successfully send the tip email, and I have learned how to successfully write a proper summary, but I haven’t yet learned what reporters need when (1) they want to talk first (and want a longer summary) or (2) when they want evidence first, and they don’t seem to have the wherewithal to explain. I have been able to get the attention of the national press. But I have not figured out how to close the deal, partly because some want to talk to me first (and I don’t tell the story well), and some want to see evidence first (and I haven’t figured out how to organize it well). Any tips for storytelling and, most especially, evidence-giving?

In terms of story-telling, I've tried creating bullet points, and lists of things to say, but the whole thing is so fraught unless they are exceedingly good listeners, I tend to flounder. This recently happened with a reporter with very important connections. I had sent this person a tip letter that spelled out all the key players and some sense of the scope of the crime, but they didn’t ask me a single question, and when they didn’t like how I started the summary (with the victims rather than the perpetrators), the interview ended. That is despite the fact I know the facts of the case extremely well at this point.

So at this point, I'm hoping they jump straight to the evidence as, it turns out, some do. In that case, I have over 100 documents that collectively tell the story, as well as a list of potential witnesses. But I do not have a single document with a gold star in the middle that says “here,” and I fear overwhelming them.

What’s the norm? A chart? A footnoted summary? I’ve been struggling with this for a while, and every time I master another element in the tip-giving process, I get stuck on another stage.

Please note that my stress levels about this are exceedingly high, and the whole case is quite loaded for me.

posted by anonymous to Law & Government (7 answers total)

Brevity.

How succinctly can you place the important information that's relevant for this person to 'pick up the phone'? You don't need to reveal all, you simply need to present what it takes to make this person call you back. There will be follow-up steps that precede an information dump. Depending on the circumstances, the reporter will probably want to go through an identity-verification and/or material-verification process before agreeing/needing to commit you both to more than that initial flash of a notice that you have a useful tip that's relevant for them.

I get whistleblower reports from time to time. That's the context from which I'm speaking (not journalism but my org takes an approach that's drawn in part from how news agencies respond, from the legal department down to the point of contact).

An example would be, "Dear X, I know you report on Y and I have information that suggests there's corruption related to Y. Please let me know if you're the right person to speak with."
posted by late afternoon dreaming hotel at 5:40 AM on March 11, 2023 [5 favorites]

I get a lot of terrible pitches, but also a lot of pitches for good stories that I just don't have the bandwidth to cover (especially when they're as complex as you describe) or that we choose not to pursue for other reasons, for example, if they overlap too much with another story we recently published. It's not uncommon to have calls that don't go anywhere; just wanted to mention that some of this may be beyond your control.

It's good that you're getting to the stage of having phone calls. I would start the call by saying that it's complex to explain quickly and let them know you struggle with that. In a normal call, they'd lead you through questions—the example you mention of a reporter not asking any questions is odd. Answer each question briefly, in just a few sentences, and then ask if they want you to keep going into more detail. If they invite you to jump into the story in an open-ended way, I would also start with a very brief summary. Then tell the story chronologically. It's the easiest way to make a story clear.
posted by pinochiette at 6:53 AM on March 11, 2023 [4 favorites]

Make it as easy as possible for the reporter.

When I worked for an advocacy organization, one of our big internal battles was in how we wrote press releases. For years, this organization had written press releases in a very informal style, using a ton of editorializing and first-person language in the copy. On the basis of some conversations I'd had with reporters, I started insisting that we write our press releases and media advisories using a more objective, journalistic style, with the explicit intention of writing them so that a busy reporter could, if they wanted to, cut and paste wholesale from our material.

If there's a smoking gun: highlight it. If there's necessary context: supply it succinctly. Connect the dots. Guide the reader. Your story has to make sense to, and hold the attention of, a person of average intelligence, little specialized knowledge in your domain, and a polite level of interest, because that is who the reporter is writing for. Imagine explaining it to an elderly relative who asks you what you have been doing at work.
posted by gauche at 8:06 AM on March 11, 2023 [2 favorites]

I can tell you how I create a narrative and organize evidence as a lawyer, for the benefit of the judge — a person, like your reporter, of above average intelligence but who knows nothing about my topic and is short on time but might be convinced to fix something if I can convince him something has gone wrong.
First, I write the story chronologically. There are more creative ways to tell a story, but you’re not a novelist, you’re someone already taxing the patience of a barely interested listener, and the best way to share a story with someone like that is to start at the beginning, then describe what happened next, then last. Then edit ruthlessly. Reorganize if you realize the reader needs to know something on page 2 that you didn’t mention until page 4. If you’ve included a fact that’s meaningful to you but not essential for the reader to understand your story, cut it.
Where I think the story ties to a document, or where the credibility of my story is bolstered by documentary proof, I cite it as a lettered exhibit (“Exhibit A”), and attach the exhibit to the written story, behind a divider page with an “Exhibit A” tab.
Only then do I come up with an introduction of no more than 1 page. This summarizes the story and includes certain storytelling themes: what are the values that this story implicates? Greed? Hypocrisy? Abuse of power? Who is the villain, the victim, the hero? If there’s a smoking gun I introduce it. The key here is brevity. And you should be able to condense this intro even further, down to an elevator pitch: “Let me tell you about judges taking bribes from private prisons to sentence impoverished kids to excessive sentences at the private prisons paying the bribes.”
posted by hhc5 at 9:13 AM on March 11, 2023 [7 favorites]

If the corruption involves an entity that has to report to the SEC, you can contact the SEC Office of the Whistleblower here. That wouldn’t be the same as reporting to an investigative journalist in terms of publication of the corruption, but it would be an effective way of reaching an investigation of and ending for the corruption.
posted by donut_princess at 11:02 AM on March 11, 2023

I can vouch for the approaches for partnering with the press described in this book, if you or anyone else needs a resource. (I edited and contributed research to it.)

Standard caveats apply: If you buy a book on whistleblowing as a resource, be careful to stay as anonymous as possible when doing so, don't take your phone with you, buy it with cash or a payment method that can't be tied back to you, etc.
posted by limeonaire at 11:16 AM on March 11, 2023 [4 favorites]

Long story short, though, what I'm not hearing yet in your question is that you've managed to establish a relationship of trust with a member of the press. Building that relationship is important, because you need to know what assurances and protection they can give you (e.g., providing secure communications channels to share the info you have, letting you know how your data will be handled and kept private within the newsroom, checking for and anonymizing or redacting any identifying marks on documents you might have, etc.). Ideally, you need to work with someone who will consider those sorts of details in establishing a partnership with you to get the information out in the world in a way that puts you in the least potential danger.

That has bearing on how you frame your disclosure to them. Because if you haven't established a relationship of trust yet with them (which can be done by discussing terms like above, establishing your bona fides on the subject in a way that keeps you anonymous or pseudonymous at least), you should keep the information you share at first limited to what helps establish that mutual trust.

If, on the other hand, the person you're talking to already knows who you are, that changes the way you might frame your disclosure.

So those are some things to think about. A good goal is to stay as anonymous as possible for as long as possible, if you still are to them. You should also do a risk assessment for yourself to determine what types of loss of anonymity might be most dangerous to you, and proceed accordingly in how you frame your disclosure (again, assuming this is anonymous or pseudonymous).

Any member of the press who can't give you some assurances about the safety and privacy of the data and information you're sharing and their ability to maintain your anonymity or pseudonymity, as well as newsroom or personal ethical policies about it, might not be the right partner in disclosing the info you have.

Good luck.
posted by limeonaire at 11:34 AM on March 11, 2023