Editing Center for Public Integrity (section)

==Reception==
[[Kevin Phillips (political commentator)|Kevin Phillips]] of [[National Public Radio]] has said, "no other investigative organization shines so many probing flashlights into so many Washington dirty-laundry baskets."<ref name="hopkins_2000"/>

In 2006, ''[[Slate (magazine)|Slate]]'' media critic [[Jack Shafer]] described CPI as having "broken as many stories as almost any big-city daily in the last couple of decades".<ref>{{cite news | first=Jack | last=Shafer |url=http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/press_box/2006/10/if_you_dont_buy_this_newspaper_.html| title=If You Don't Buy This Newspaper ... We'll shoot your democracy. | work=Slate.com | date=October 23, 2006}}</ref>

===Funding from supporters of legal restrictions on campaign finance===
Writing in ''[[The Wall Street Journal]]'' in March 2005, commentator [[John Fund]] accused CPI of being a member of what he termed the "campaign finance lobby."<ref name="WSJ-Pew">{{cite news|last=John Fund |title=Astroturf Politics | work = The Wall Street Journal |date=March 21, 2005 |url= http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110006449 |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20060314185523/http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110006449 |archive-date=March 14, 2006}}</ref> Citing a speech by Sean Treglia, former program manager at [[Pew Charitable Trusts]], Fund argued that a "stealth campaign" by "eight liberal foundations" fomented a false sense of public demand for new restrictions on the financing of public campaigns.<ref name="WSJ-Pew"/> Fund singled out CPI as a front group pushing Pew's agenda, arguing that "reporters are used to attempts to hoodwink officials into thinking an issue is genuinely popular, and they frequently expose them. But when "good government" groups like the Center for Public Integrity engage in the same tactics, journalists usually ignore it."<ref name="WSJ-Pew"/>

CPI's Bill Allison responded to criticisms arising from Tregalia's speech by emphasizing that Pew's contributions to the CPI's work on campaign finance have always been forthrightly disclosed.<ref name="Allison-Pew">{{cite news | first = Bill | last = Allison | title = Puzzling Evidence | publisher = The Center for Public Integrity | date = March 23, 2005 | url = http://www.iwatchnews.org/2005/03/23/3123/commentary-puzzling-evidence | archive-url = https://archive.today/20130415040749/http://www.iwatchnews.org/2005/03/23/3123/commentary-puzzling-evidence | url-status = dead | archive-date = April 15, 2013}}</ref> In a published argument with blogger Ryan Sager, Allison also disputed the notion that the CPI's work amounted to advocacy. Allison stated, "the purpose of our grants is to do things like code hundreds of thousands of public records, put them in a database and post them on our Website so anyone can use them. The amount of money we've gotten to push [[Campaign finance reform in the United States|campaign finance reform]] is $0.<ref name= "SagerVsAllison-Pew">{{cite news|first=Ryan |last=Sager |title=Allison Responds |publisher=Miscellaneous Objections |date=March 23, 2005 |url= http://www.rhsager.com/mo/2005/03/allison_respond.html |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20060513063513/http://www.rhsager.com/mo/2005/03/allison_respond.html |archive-date=May 13, 2006}}</ref>

In another essay on CPI's website, Allison challenged CPI's critics, and Fund specifically, arguing that:<ref name= "AllisonVsFund-Pew">{{cite news | title = No Good Deed Goes Unpunished | publisher = The Center for Public Integrity | date = March 22, 2005 | url = http://www.iwatchnews.org/2005/03/23/3123/commentary-puzzling-evidence | archive-url = https://archive.today/20130415040749/http://www.iwatchnews.org/2005/03/23/3123/commentary-puzzling-evidence | url-status = dead | archive-date = April 15, 2013}}</ref>{{blockquote|[Fund] doesn't cite a single instance in which the Center has attempted to "hoodwink" government officials (or anyone else, for that matter) into thinking campaign finance is a genuinely popular issue, because he can't. We simply don't operate that way. We don't do public relations campaigns.  We don't lobby Congress.  We don't petition the Federal Election Commission. We don't pretend we have legions of individuals contributing money to support our work. Our paid membership amounts to around six thousand people; we'd certainly be happy to have more... as for Mr. Fund, back in the days when campaign finance issues were of concern to him, he sought us out to lend authority to his writings on John Huang and quoted us in an Oct. 29, 1996, column on the subject. Is it Mr. Fund's view that when he wrote about various DNC campaign finance violations, he was trying to hoodwink federal officials into thinking that people cared about the issue?}}

===Looting the Seas controversy===
In November 2010, CPI published a report on bluefin tuna overfishing entitled "Looting the Seas".<ref name= looting>{{cite web|title=Looting the Seas |url=http://www.pewtrusts.org/events_detail.aspx?id=61407&selectedDate=09/01/2011&nav=past |publisher= [[Pew Charitable Trust]]|date= November 9, 2010 |access-date= June 9, 2012|url-status= dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110506000034/http://www.pewtrusts.org/events_detail.aspx?id=61407 |archive-date= 6 May 2011}}</ref> ''[[Politico]]'' reported that "to obtain key information for the project, reporters accessed a database maintained by an intergovernmental fisheries regulatory body with a password given by a source, likely breaking the law." CPI's own lawyer and an outside law firm both determined that CPI's staff likely broke the law in obtaining information for the report. In addition, one of the experts quoted in the associated documentary was paid $15,000 as a project consultant to CPI.<ref name=tuna>{{cite web|title=Tuna and turmoil at CPI|url= http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/69763.html| work =[[Politico]]|date= December 5, 2011|access-date=June 9, 2012}}</ref> The investigative methods used to produce the report became a point of contention within the organization when CPI employee John Solomon made a number of accusations against the team that had worked on the series.

CPI board member and former ''[[The New York Times]]'' Washington bureau chief [[Bill Kovach]] was asked by then-CPI president [[William Buzenberg]] to look into the matter. Kovach concluded that CPI's reporting was "sound, ethical and fully in the public interest."<ref>{{cite web|title=Something fishy?|url= https://www.cjr.org/feature/something_fishy.php | work =[[Columbia Journalism Review]] |date=July–August 2012|access-date= 16 July 2012}}</ref> In addition, the board hired an outside law firm to answer the legal questions. [[Columbia Journalism Review]] reported: "As for the legality of using the password to access data, the lawyers concluded that, in theory, a prosecutor might argue it violated the [[Computer Fraud and Abuse Act]]. But whether it actually did was open to debate. And, in any case, it was highly unlikely that charges would ever be brought." In the wake of the controversy, David Kaplan and John Solomon resigned from CPI. CPI officials also withdrew their entry of the tuna story for a [[Pulitzer Prize]].<ref name=tuna/> Andy Revkin of ''The New York Times'' wrote, "the relationship of the television production to a United Nations agency and an environmental group can prompt questions about objectivity, but the package, over all, appears robust."<ref>{{cite news|title=Report Reveals Forces Destroying Atlantic Bluefin Tuna|url=http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/08/report-reveals-forces-destroying-atlantic-bluefin-tuna/|work=[[The New York Times]]|date=November 8, 2010 |access-date=June 9, 2012|first= Andrew C.|last=Revkin}}</ref> The Looting the Seas series won two journalism awards: the Renner Award from [[Investigative Reporters and Editors]]<ref>{{cite web|title=2010 IRE Awards winners|url=http://ire.org/awards/ire-awards/winners/2010-ire-awards-winners/|publisher=Investigative Reporters and Editors|access-date=June 9, 2012|archive-date=May 30, 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120530041144/http://ire.org/awards/ire-awards/winners/2010-ire-awards-winners/|url-status=dead}}</ref> and the 2010 Whitman Bassow Award from the Overseas Press Club of America.<ref>{{cite web|title=The Whitman Bassow Award 2010 |date=April 11, 2011 |url=http://opcofamerica.org/awards/whitman-bassow-award-2010|publisher=Overseas Press Club of America|access-date=June 16, 2012}}</ref>

===Coordination with advocacy groups===
In 2011, ''[[Politico]]'' called into question CPI's collaboration with advocacy organizations. ''Politico'' reported that CPI had coordinated the release of a report on [[Koch Industries]] with [[Greenpeace]]. ''Politico'' also reported that [[Pew Charitable Trusts]], a funder of the Looting the Seas report, hosted a screening of a CPI documentary and then organized a call to action with other NGOs for the protection of bluefin tuna. In 2008, CPI published a report on tobacco that was both funded by and promoted by an advocacy group called Tobacco Free Kids.<ref name=rubin>{{cite news|title=Is the Center for Public Integrity's work advocacy or journalism?|url= https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/is-the-center-for-public-integritys-work-advocacy-or-journalism/2011/03/29/gIQAJEnrwJ_blog.html |newspaper= [[The Washington Post]]|date=September 2, 2011|access-date=June 9, 2012|first= Jennifer |last=Rubin}}</ref><ref name= coordination>{{cite web|title=CPI's other coordination with advocacy groups|url= http://www.politico.com/blogs/onmedia/0911/CPIs_other_coordination_with_advocacy_groups.html| work =[[Politico]]|date= September 2, 2011|access-date=June 9, 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Did CPI coordinate with Greenpeace?|url= http://www.politico.com/blogs/onmedia/0811/Did_CPI_coordinate_with_Greenpeace.html | work =[[Politico]]|date=August 29, 2011|access-date=June 9, 2012}}</ref>

===Awards===
In 1996, the CPI received the [[Society of Professional Journalists]] [[Sigma Delta Chi Award]] for Public Service in Online Journalism (Independent) for their report entitled "Fat Cat Hotel: How Democratic High-Rollers are Rewarded with Overnight Stays at the White House" by the Public i staff and Margaret Ebrahim.<ref name="SPJ_1996">{{cite web | url=http://www.spj.org/news.asp?ref=488 | title=1996 Sigma Delta Chi Award Winners | publisher=SPJ News | date=1997 | access-date=April 7, 2016}}</ref>

CPI received the [[George Polk Awards|George Polk Award]] in 2003 for its investigation of [[Military budget of the United States|US military spending]] in [[Iraq War|Iraq]] and [[War in Afghanistan (2001–present)|Afghanistan]] ("Windfalls of War: U.S. Contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan").<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.publicintegrity.org/national-security/windfalls-war|title=Windfalls of War|work=Center for Public Integrity|access-date=April 12, 2013|archive-date=April 29, 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130429180636/http://www.publicintegrity.org/national-security/windfalls-war|url-status=dead}}</ref> Its work led to widespread media coverage that increased [[United States Congress|congressional]] scrutiny of military spending.<ref>{{cite news|title=L.A. Times Journalists Honored With Two Polk Awards|url= https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2004-feb-17-me-polk17-story.html|access-date = April 13, 2013|newspaper=Los Angeles Times|date=February 17, 2004|author=Staff writer}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=McFadden|first=Robert D.|title=Journalists Who Braved Iraq and African Wars Are Among 14 Polk Award Winners|url= https://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/17/nyregion/journalists-who-braved-iraq-and-african-wars-are-among-14-polk-award-winners.html| access-date = April 4, 2013|newspaper=The New York Times|date=February 17, 2004}}</ref>

In 2011, CPI won a [[James Aronson Award|James Aronson Award for Social Justice Journalism]] for their investigation of weak inspections endangering factory workers and surrounding communities.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://brie.hunter.cuny.edu/aronson/?p=1416|archive-url=https://archive.today/20121212170619/http://brie.hunter.cuny.edu/aronson/?p=1416|url-status=dead|archive-date=December 12, 2012|title=2011 Aronson Award winners expose "pink" fundraising fraud, widespread abuse of the developmentally disabled, refineries loosely inspected and bad cops undisciplined|publisher=[[Hunter College]]|date=April 4, 2012|access-date=June 10, 2012}}</ref>

In 2012, CPI reporter [[Michael Hudson (reporter)|Michael Hudson]] won a "Best-in-Business" award for digital investigative reporting from the [[Society of American Business Editors and Writers]]. Hudson won the award for his report entitled ''The Great Mortgage Cover-Up.''<ref>{{cite news | url=http://sabew.org/2012/03/2012-bib-award-winners/|title=Complete list of winners in SABEW's 17th annual Best in Business Awards|publisher=[[Society of American Business Editors and Writers]]|access-date=June 10, 2012}}</ref>

CPI's work has also received awards from [[PEN Center USA|PEN USA]], [[Investigative Reporters and Editors]], [[the Society of Professional Journalists]], the Association of Capitol Reporters and Editors, the [[National Press Foundation]], the [[Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy]] and others.<ref name="awards">{{cite news|url=http://www.iwatchnews.org/about/our-work/awards|title=Awards|publisher=The Center for Public Integrity|access-date=June 10, 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120415110140/http://www.iwatchnews.org/about/our-work/awards|archive-date=April 15, 2012|url-status=dead|df=mdy-all}}</ref>

CPI reporter Chris Hamby won the 2014 [[Pulitzer Prize]] for investigative reporting. Hamby's story reported that doctors and lawyers working for the coal industry helped defeat benefit claims of coal miners who had contracted black lung disease.<ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.publicintegrity.org/2014/04/14/14593/center-wins-first-pulitzer-prize|title=Center wins first Pulitzer Prize|publisher=Center for Public Integrity|access-date=April 14, 2014}}</ref> After CPI's Pulitzer win, ''[[Politico]]'' reported that "ABC News has accused The Center for Public Integrity of downplaying the network's contributions to a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative report, setting off a bitter public dispute between two news organizations that once worked as partners." CPI executive director Bill Buzenberg said that ABC News overstated its contributions to the story.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Byers|first1=Dylan|title=Pulitzer prize fight|url=http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/04/abc-news-says-center-for-public-integrity-misled-pulitzer-186945.html|access-date=July 30, 2014|work=Politico|date=April 16, 2014}}</ref>

In 2022, the ''Center for Public Integrity and Transmitter Media'' was nominated for a Podcast & Radio [[Peabody Award]] for their episode ''The Wealth Vortex''.<ref>{{Cite web |title=83rd Peabody Award Nominees |url=https://peabodyawards.com/awards/nominees/ }}</ref>