America has typically been in support of correspondents as muckrakers since it reminds them that the media’s job is to be the watchdog. Muckraking is considered as an investigative mode of journalism that sheds light on social ills like corruption that involve people in government such as legislators and personalities and then broadcasting the controversy. In doing so, journalists can invoke change or instigate conversations within the public domain to bring about change.
Models of Muckraking
Muckraking comprises three different models; simple muckraking, leaping impact muckraking, and truncated muckraking. Foremost, simple muckraking entails when a correspondent decides to explore an issue and investigation results in the broadcasting of the news regarding a particular controversy that may stir public views. An excellent example of simple muckraking is when a reporter from Denver 9News investigated a claim that Denver cops abused the use of the Database system. The second model involves the Leaping Impact muckraking, which depicts that if some aspects within the paradigm are skipped, then it becomes a leaping impact model. Also, executives may act devoid of any pressure from public views due to investigations and broadcasting of a story. Lastly, In truncated muckraking, which says that an arrangement is terminated at some point so that accounts concerning the inquiry are not printed or forsake reforms.
Consequences of Muckraking models
There are several implications regarding the muckraking models. In simple muckraking models, it enables the members of the media to easily arouse the opinion of the public that results in the enforcement of changes. Leap impact muckraking enables the collaboration between the citizens and government officials in fighting a vice. Lastly, truncated muckraking has enabled policymakers to administer punishment to individuals but fail to act to correct an issue.