Four Reasons Local TV Newsrooms Should Have a Researcher
By Theresa Collington Moore, news researcher, WTSP-TV

One obvious benefit of a television-newspaper partnership is the access the TV station gets to a full time researcher. But a researcher based at the newspaper isn’t likely to put the station’s interests first. A staff researcher will. In October 2002, WTSP-TV in St. Petersburg, FL, created a researcher position and hired Theresa Collington Moore. “I feel like, now that I'm in the mix, not having a researcher would be likened to trying to play softball without a catcher, or field hockey without a goalie,” she says. Moore works stories with reporters, and finds breakout material for producers. She also spends at least one day a week training herself on a new database or learning about a process like access to public records. “It's a huge time-saver for the news room,” Moore says. Here are her top four reasons why local TV newsrooms should have a researcher:

Track people close to the news, fast

The power of finding people fast cannot be underestimated. When a reporter is running out the door, it’s more than just helpful; these days it’s essential. Between what’s now available to the public on the Internet, and the types of powerful search services your competition may have, finding just a few details as reporters run out the door to cover breaking news has become more than just an added feature of a having a researcher. It is truly vital to not missing the important elements of breaking news.

Let’s say the address of a burning building is announced over the scanners. In less than the time it takes to run your show’s shortest V/O, a researcher can usually get names and numbers of neighboring businesses and residences, which can be passed along to the reporter or the assignment desk. Or the researcher can make some calls to people near the scene and get their version of what’s happening. Often, the neighbors can tell you more than the officials, and sometimes even give a more accurate description of what’s actually taking place -– things like “the building next door just caught fire too,” “the firemen aren’t here yet,” or even “nothing’s going on – the fire is out.” Think of the time and effort that could save.

Backgrounding

Besides finding people fast, a good researcher can find the background on pretty much anything. Going back to the example of the burning building, researchers can find out quickly who owns the building, how much they paid for it, when it was built, and the previous owners, tenants, or businesses that may have occupied the space. They can determine if there have been problems at the same place in the past, and if the building or its owner have been in the news before.

Taking things a step further, a researcher can look up the personal history of the building’s owner. He or she can determine whether or not they’ve ever declared bankruptcy, if they have a criminal history, what other properties they own, and if any of their other properties have ever caught fire. Now, this information may not immediately make air, but it can provide folks in the newsroom a good sense very early on of where the story may be going, and if it is worth pursuing. And this type of information and discovery applies not just to burning buildings but to many situations that newsrooms are faced with each day.

Part of the really powerful role of the news researcher is the ability to provide background checks for reporters in the field. Since my boss has advised me not to give away trade secrets, I’ll stop there. But I’m sure you can imagine how useful someone becomes who is able to help a reporter in the field determine whether or not the person they are talking to is a credible source or a criminal.

Details, details

Facts are better than adjectives when it comes to strengthening a story, a pitch, a lead, a tag, or an argument. Managers are more inclined to accept a story idea when it’s not just a cool idea but a cool idea that can be illustrated with the use of supporting fact-based information. To find the obscure yet interesting takes time. And those drawn to careers as news researchers are folks that by nature get excited -– passionate even -- about finding the obscure facts that help confirm, deny or strengthen a story or an argument. A great marriage can occur between reporters and producers, who can be pretty inquisitive, and researchers, who are usually information junkies by nature.

Examples of that kind of partnership happen every day in my job. Sometimes reporters have an idea or a lead on a story, but need more facts to sell it to the managers in the newsroom. An education reporter really wants to do a story on home schooling, but each time she pitches it, it gets put aside. So, as a researcher, I’ll see if I can find her the number of home-schooled students in our market, how many of them go on to college, and how they do on standardized testing as compared to their conventionally schooled counterparts. Once I find the information and pass it along to her, we can collaborate on the story pitch, and cross our fingers when it’s time to put it in front of the powers-that-be in the newsroom. And chances are, with a better backbone based in fact, the story will be sold, and produced to air, maybe even during a ratings period.

Check out the “Heards”

In just about every news meeting, someone starts a sentence with, “They say,” “I heard” or “I’ll bet.” But how often do you learn whether it’s true? The fact is – research takes time, and reporters and producers often are focused on their daily turns. Spending the time it takes to debunk or confirm everything they hear on the street is not an option for them. That’s where a researcher comes in.

Recently, an executive producer said, “I heard Congressmen don’t pay for Social Security.” So I checked on the web and found out this was an email rumor; Congressmen do in fact pay a form of Social Security. A producer wanted to know if Bob Keeshan (you may know him better as ‘Captain Kangaroo’) ever served in World War II with Lee Marvin. Research shows that this is false, too, a rumor that may have started with one of Marvin’s appearances on the Tonight Show. A reporter wanted to make sure that Florida is the number one state for citrus production. That’s true—a fact that helped our story on citrus canker. (And if you need to know more about citrus canker…but I digress.)

Inquiries like these, and similar ones like “I wonder who owns that property,” might normally fall through the cracks, given the time constraints of TV news. But answers to these questions lend depth and strength to storytelling, and can sometimes become the focal point of the story. Chances are, if these “heards” make their way to the newsroom, viewers have heard them too and want us to provide the truth. Confirming or denying them only takes someone whose time is dedicated to finding out the truth.

The Internet is a great source, but information on the web is often erroneous. The journalist’s mantra “If your mother says she loves you, check it out” can’t be repeated enough. A full-time researcher can always be there to “make like a store clerk and check it out.”

Besides, the job is really fun. I’ve been asked to find out how many Elvis impersonators there are in the US, the number of the Sponge Bob Square Pants episode where Sponge Bob teaches the Heimlich maneuver, to test some long-wearing lipsticks for a story, and to see if there’s a world record for the largest sandcastle. (Hint: there is.) As an information junkie employed as a newsroom researcher, I’m in the right place.