The New Definition for "Beat Reporter"

Trey Smith

In the heyday of independent journalism, many of the stories read in the newspaper were the work of beat reporters. According to Wikipedia,

Beat reporting, also known as specialized reporting, is a genre of journalism that can be described as the craft of in-depth reporting on a particular issue, sector, organization or institution over time. Beat reporters build up a base of knowledge on and gain familiarity with the topic, allowing them to provide insight and commentary in addition to reporting straight facts. This distinguishes them from other journalists who might cover similar stories from time to time.

An example would be the reporter who covers the city hall beat. This guy or gal would attend and report on all city council meetings as well as committee hearings. This person would be familiar with the laws, ordinances and regulations that pertained to city government. All of this familiarity and background allows the city hall beat reporter the ability to better analyze what actually is going on and to better determine if what certain city officials SAY matches up with the facts.

Today, however, the term "beat reporter" is taking on an altogether different meaning. The word beat is no longer used as a noun; it's now being utilized as a verb! This grammatical change has been undertaken because the government -- and here I'm specifically referring to the US government -- wants to beat (defeat) or beat (punish) those who report things the government would rather they not report.

As Dan Froomkin writes in The Obama Administration Is Criminalizing Investigative Reporting,

Criminally investigating the kinds of leaks that are the bread and butter of national security investigative reporting is a noxious overreaction by hyper-controlling government officials who don’t want us to know what’s being done in our name.

Attorney General Eric Holder announced last week that he has assigned two U.S. attorneys to lead criminal leak investigations into recent media reports about topics including how drone attacks are approved at the White House and how a computer virus attack was launched against Iran’s nuclear program.

There is such a thing as a criminal leak — for instance, when an administration official intentionally outs a covert CIA operative in an attempt to discredit an administration critic.

But leaks that expose secrets that have momentous public policy implications need to be treated differently, because they are a critical part of our nation’s system of checks and balances. Knowledge is essential to the public’s ability to restrain executive (and legislative) power.

Simply by announcing this sort of "investigation" -- defeating the aim of investigative journalism -- the government hopes to intimidate reporters in the future. The best way not to risk being hassled by the government is to censor yourself! Why report on important government secrets if doing so places your job and/or freedom in jeopardy? Wouldn't it be better to write fluff stories and stuff handed you by official government spokespersons?

This, of course, leads to the other definition of beat -- punishing reporters for having the audacity to report the sort of stuff that the government wishes to keep hidden from public view. D.H. Kerby talks about this in relation to the prosecution of Julian Assange. The dogged determination to reel in Assange is because the US government wants to make Assange, WikiLeaks and, by association, Bradley Manning, the poster children for what can happen to a reporter (and their sources) if they cross the government. Sure, you can report ANYTHING you want, the Obama administration says, but you're going to pay for it with your life!

There aren't too many reporters out there who will decide willingly and courageously to look down the barrel of this gun and not blink.

Would you?