Investigative journalism was introduced to China in the late 20th century. Unlike the role of its counterpart acting as the Fourth Estate in democracies, Chinese investigative journalism acts as an extension of state power to control, monitor local powers and to improve “socialist democracy”. For Chinese investigative journalists, they see themselves the conscience of Chinese society, and take investigative journalism as the highest benchmark in journalism field. Thus either for the need of the state or for the individual’s career pursuit in the journalism field, investigative journalism plays a significant role in Chinese society. However, a statistic in 2017 shows a dramatic decline in investigative journalists in China, compared with that six years ago, which raises the questions towards the predicaments of investigative journalism and possibilities of realisation of its role in digital age. Two distinguished characteristics of investigative journalism, which also distinguished investigative journalism from other kinds of journalism, can account for parts of the predicament currently. First, it’s leak-oriented which requires more unofficial or anonymous sources. Second, it takes more responsibilities to protect for sources, because they can only obtain valuable information if they keep sources safe. Despite new technology makes it possible for journalists to protect the whistle-blower’s identity through encrypted communication platforms, investigative journalists are affected significantly in an era of surveillance and digital privacy erosion. Also, the chilling effect generated afterwards, and the absence of privacy are believed to be decisive obstacles to communication.
This research aims to explore these problems Chinese investigative journalism face from the perspective of communication rights, trying to examine how communication rights manifest itself in the group of investigative journalists in digital age, and to what extent the rights investigative journalists should have were harmed in China. All these discussions are focused only in the process of news production. According to the assessment framework of rights proposed by the CRIS campaign, which is generic and not designed based in any particular place, and coupled with the characteristics of investigative journalism, the study proposes, in digital age, the rights of investigative journalists is closely related to these aspects: information privacy and data protection; privacy of communication; communication surveillance in public and workplace. To examine how communication rights were implemented and eroded in the group of investigative journalists in Chinese contextbased on the three dimensions (case studies) , the research finds out, the communication rights investigative journalists have are easily to be eroded due to the contradiction between civil rights and rights of investigative journalists, chilling effects generated from mass surveillance and the weakened effectiveness of legal protections, as well as the deficiency of legal system. Thus the research suggests to ensure investigative journalists functioning for the good of society, this special group should be empowered with more particular rights or policies, to secure their rights to investigation and rights to defend themselves.