COMPARE INVESTIGATIVE AND INTERPRETATIVE REPORTING

Interpretive reporting often involves the same skills but takes the interpretation to a
different level.
The fundamental difference between the two is that original investigative reporting
uncovers information not before gathered by others in order to inform the public of events
or circumstances that might affect their lives.
Interpretive reporting is as a result of careful thought and analysis of an idea as well as
dogged pursuit of facts to bring together information in a new, more complete context
which provides deeper public understanding.
Investigative reporting as it were could be vague and may make no cogent or reasonable
meaning to its reader or general public without a thorough interpretive reporting a case in
point is the New York Times publication of the pentagon papers in 1971.
The paper themselves were a secret study obtained by an investigative journalist who cover
the American involvement in Vietnam War, this was written by the government reporter
Neil Sheehan.
Then a team of New York Times reporters and editors expert in foreign policy and the
Vietnam War interpreted and organized the documents into a dramatic account of public
deception.
Without this synthesis and interpretation, the pentagon papers would have meant little to
most of the public.

In this case the investigative reporters created a platform on which the interpretive
journalist could build.
That is while the investigative reporters dig deep and bring to fore a matter, the interpretive
journalists in synergy dig deeper and unravel what was initially exposed by the former.
It is also important to note that while timeliness play an important role in the investigative
reporter, that is time is involved in bringing out the news in a matter being investigated,
more time is required in interpreting such findings.
Also, whereas the investigative reporter could work in isolation and be nosy about gathering
his\her information, the interpretive reporters depend on others who are experts in various
beats or non journalist professionals to arrive at an acceptable conclusion, hear editors, sub
editors and other professional on the subject matter are co opted.
While a lot of respect and kudos and recognition is given to an investigative reporter who is
through stint of investigation is able to give news that are timely and make good editorials
and headlines the same can not be said of the interpreter who sometimes are maligned by
other professionals as being polemics rather than journalism, some were accused as
activists rather than journalists a case in point was the paper reporting of the jumbo pay to
legislators, this was reported as a passing phrase by the Governor of Central Bank of Nigeria
to buttress his point while presenting his paper on the Economic fortunes.
Of the nation Nigeria, this was widely reported over time by most newspaper, a follow up
by interpreting this would make a better news and this will further enlighten and educate
the masses, but it is a sorry case that there is no harmony between the investigative
reporters and the interpreter as there is low level of synergy and convergence within the
media houses in nation, Nigeria as all are individualistic in nature merely eking to earn a
living mostly through patronage of individuals, corporate and government organs and
parastatals.
No authentic journalist can claim without lying that he\she is unconcerned with issues
confronting his community, whether it be nation or state or local government of his birth,
thus investigative reporting is a special reporting and more thorough than news reporting as
in interpretation reporting which according to Lester Markel, editor of Sunday New York
Times gives news depth and with care.
News refreshed with background materials to make it comprehensive and meaningful.
Interpretive reporting derives its objective judgment based on background knowledge and
information provided by investigative reporter.