Crusading journalism's bark is worse than its bite.

• Author: Saltzman, Joe
• Position: Column

One sure-fire way to polish up the tarnished image of the journalist has been to launch a public crusade against the bad guys. Whenever circulation was down or the newspaper's image was in trouble, it was time to wage a campaign against society's traditional enemies: drink, gambling, prize fighting, and prostitution. More serious editors would go after political corruption, consumer fraud, and prison reform.

Readers loved a good crusade because they felt the newspaper was representing them against the rich and powerful, protecting their interests against corrupt political or business forces. Occasionally, the paper even would perform an important public service and become the court of last resort for the poor, sick, and unrepresented. But more often than not, it was business as usual; newspapers tended to reflect a white, male, middle-class morality, defend the status quo, and support those running government and big business. Journalists were expected not to rock the boat, simply to report the facts made available to them and let the chips fall where they may. Still, the occasional crusade, with positive results plastered across the front page, was trotted out at regular intervals to increase circulation and goodwill.

The same thing took place in television. News broadcasts, documentaries, and, later, news magazines knew that the public responded to crusades that exposed evil and brought the corrupt to justice. So, it's no surprise that many of the new TV reality shows have followed this dependable path to higher ratings and favorable public response.

"America's Most Wanted" asks everyday citizens to bring criminals to justice. An exposed on "20/20," "60 Minutes," or "Dateline" reveals injustice and wins applause. Front Page" reporters claim to be the people's champions. "The Crusaders" and "Case Closed" market themselves as exposing wrongdoers and bringing them to justice.

This kind of crusading journalism may help an individual and may even result in a permanent change or two for the public good. But usually there's more smoke than fire, more hyperbole than substance, more shouting than reason, more bark than bite.

One of the problems in doing responsible, thorough crusades is that they take a lot of research, investigative reporting, time, and money. They also offer a nasty problem to the newspaper or broadcast management supporting the crusade-they sometimes step on sensitive toes. Major advertisers, powerful politicians, and...