TOTAL MEDIA
FIELD GUIDE
ESCAEN
Guides / Investigative reporting: build a hypothesis that can fail
Free guides and practical tools · EN

Investigative reporting: build a hypothesis that can fail

A sound investigation asks a testable question, seeks independent records and testimony, and leaves room for its first explanation to be wrong.

Reviewed 2026-10-064 min · Estimated reading time
Practice pathway: Hypothesis and scope → Original documents → Independent sources → Challenge and response → Attributed writing → Publication review
Practice pathway · Investigative reporting: build a hypothesis that can fail
01

Define the claim

Write the central proposition and three observable facts that would support or undermine it. Separate leads, original documents and interpretations. Map affected people and who deserves a chance to respond. Before approaching a source, decide what personal data is genuinely needed and how you will protect it.

02

Build a reproducible timeline

Store each document with its date and provenance. Record what it shows and what it cannot show. Compare public records with first-hand accounts; two reports repeating one press release are not independent confirmation. Actively seek an alternative explanation. For numerical claims, keep the data and steps needed to reproduce the calculation.

03

Publish with a response path

Put specific allegations to the person or organization concerned with a reasonable opportunity to answer. Seek editorial and legal review where appropriate. Distinguish verified facts, responses and remaining questions. Prepare a correction route and continue protecting sensitive material after publication.

Practice pathway

  1. Hypothesis and scopeRecord the decision and keep a version you can review.
  2. Original documentsRecord the decision and keep a version you can review.
  3. Independent sourcesRecord the decision and keep a version you can review.
  4. Challenge and responseRecord the decision and keep a version you can review.
  5. Attributed writingRecord the decision and keep a version you can review.
  6. Publication reviewRecord the decision and keep a version you can review.
Worked example

A piece with clear limits

Fictional hypothesis: three contracts exceed their planned budgets. Log each award’s date, amount, original document and later amendments. Check whether amounts include tax and whether an amendment explains the difference. Three stories repeating one press release are not independent confirmations.

Try it

Investigate a small public decision: date, document, decision maker, effect and response. Build an evidence table linking every claim to a source and limitation. Ask an editor to try to disprove your conclusion.

Project deliverable

A reviewed piece, its source sheet and a note explaining what changed.

Download a working template

A pathway, worked example and six checks in an editable file. No account.

Download TXT ↓

Review before publishing

Never publish an accusation from an unattributed screenshot alone.

Quality check0 / 6 · Checks completed

Frequently asked questions

Can I enroll through this page?

The 2024–25 catalog informs today’s self-directed guides. No enrollment or accredited qualifications are offered.

What do I need to practise?

Start with this guide’s exercise and template. Use a document for sources and, for audio or video, a device that can record a test you can review. Choose material you have permission to use.

How do I review the result?

Investigate a small public decision: date, document, decision maker, effect and response. Build an evidence table linking every claim to a source and limitation. Ask an editor to try to disprove your conclusion.

Sources and provenance

The example and pathway are new work; historical sources document the former topic, not a current offer.

Continue with these guides

01

Television reporting: make every image answer a question

A strong video report needs evidence as well as pictures. Plan images around verifiable questions and keep the edit faithful to what happened.

02

Media scriptwriting: give every scene a job

A usable script shows what changes, who needs to know and how the audience will see or hear it.

03

Digital journalism: publish a story that can be checked and updated

The web lets a story grow and be corrected. That advantage matters only if readers can see what changed and where each claim came from.

Tools ↗

Trace the number to the table that defines it

Save the claim as it appeared and follow its references to the record that defines what was counted. Keep the page or table number, version and time interval. A second post copying the same release still depends on the same source.

  1. Record the sentence, date and publisher. Separate the number from its interpretation.
  2. Open the reference, locate the original cell and read the column heading and footnote. Check unit, population and period.
  3. Recalculate the change. Write a sentence limited to the table’s measure and record the open question.

Fictional exercise: a post announces “50% more readers.” It cites a release that links to a monthly lending table: 800 loans in April and 1,200 in May. (1,200 − 800) / 800 = 50%. The table counts transactions, so a person can appear several times. The supportable sentence is “Recorded loans rose from 800 to 1,200.” To report on readers, request a distinct-person count using the same definition and coverage in both months.

Record to reuse: claim ___ · intermediary ___ · document and table ___ · unit ___ · periods ___ · calculation ___ · supported sentence ___ · missing data ___.

The post says readers. The release points to a table. The table counts loans.
The original column heading determines what the increase can describe.

UNESCO journalism handbook, module 6