Magazine article Nieman Reports

Investigating the Pharmaceutical Industry on a Blog: '... Evidence Itself Often Emerged as the Centerpiece, Which Has a Strong Impact on the Audience When They See for Themselves the Incriminating Paper Trail.'

Magazine article Nieman Reports

Investigating the Pharmaceutical Industry on a Blog: '... Evidence Itself Often Emerged as the Centerpiece, Which Has a Strong Impact on the Audience When They See for Themselves the Incriminating Paper Trail.'

Article excerpt

Two years ago, I began a grand experiment on the Internet--I launched a blog called Pharmalot to focus on the pharmaceutical industry, which I had been following for more than a decade for The Star-Ledger in New Jersey. There were several reasons I did so: The newspaper was looking for ways to embrace and exploit the Internet, and I was interested in getting ahead of the curve by finding new ways to cover my beat.

The gambit worked. Nowadays, reporters meet some of their best sources online. Take the case of the disgusted sales representative. I encountered this person after posting an item on Pharmalot, which I ran full time with up to 10 newsy posts every day. Some were grabbed from other media, providing links to the original story; other stories, I generated myself. The blog's audience was diverse, although they were drawn to it by an interest in news about the pharmaceutical industry. Comments often developed into informative discussions and heated debates among people both in and out of the business.

One day, a person commented about a Pfizer item. These remarks clearly demonstrated that this person had inside information about sales practices, so I asked this anonymous commenter to send me a private e-mail in hopes of learning more. A few days later, an e-mail arrived, and we began a correspondence that led, in time, to telephone conversations. Still, for weeks I didn't knout this person's true identity, and for a while I was unable to verify many details I was being told about allegedly illegal marketing activities for an HIV medicine.

Eventually, I gained this person's trust. And that's when the documents began to arrive in my e-mail box--dozens of them. Some were internal e-mails and memos, others were company manuals and presentations from meetings. More time was spent on the phone digesting all this material and then placing it in chronological order to tell a complicated story about employees who stretched rules that appeared to violate Pfizer policy and, more importantly, a corporate integrity agreement with federal authorities.

In some ways, this approach to investigating a story was similar to what I'd done when I reported on these same topics for The Star-Ledger--meet sources, gain their trust, research information received, then flesh out the story. What made this different was not so much how I reported the story but how I was able to tell it. On my blog, once I had verified that the documents were authentic, I used them--in their entirety--to illustrate the marketing violations, which Pfizer acknowledged were being investigated.

Each post in my three-part series contained a few introductory paragraphs that offered a brief, narrative setup explaining the background and significance. After that, I let the reproduced documents do the rest; their mere presence was powerful enough to convince visitors to my blog of the problems my story highlighted. (1)

The Value of Quick Hits

This story describes just one way that Pharmalot altered my approach to investigating and disseminating news. I was no longer confined to the conventional structure of a news story that relied heavily on narrative, despite the importance it has in explaining context and fleshing out an interesting tale. Instead, evidence itself often emerged as the centerpiece, which has a strong impact on the audience when they see for themselves the incriminating paper trail.

I also tried to write stories in a way that they can be told over the radio. By doing this I returned to a more conversational style that connects with people in a way that the dispassionate newspaper tone often fails to do.

Most of the stories on Pharmalot were 300 to 500 words in length, and they rarely appeared as part of a longer series, as the piece about Pfizer did. I did examine other issues and spent days, even weeks, compiling substantive posts (exceeding 1,000 words) that have resembled the sort of in-depth piece that would appear in a Sunday newspaper. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.