You can’t fall in love with your story: Julian Sher

Veteran Canadian investigative journalist and documentary filmmaker Julian Sher has spent decades uncovering organised crime, corruption and disputed convictions. He served as the Senior Producer of CBC's flagship investigative program, The Fifth Estate, for five years and worked for major newspapers like the Toronto Star and The Globe and Mail. 

Speaking to Shadique Mahbub Islam from The Business Standard at the Bangladesh Journalism Conference 2026, organised by the Media Resources Development Initiative (MRDI) in Dhaka, Julian Sher reflected on the challenges of investigative journalism in countries with weak institutions, the importance of anonymous sources, and why journalists must resist becoming emotionally attached to their own investigations. He discussed newsroom credibility, political bias in the media, and the need for a strong civil society to protect press freedom. 

Investigative journalism often involves huge amounts of information. How do reporters find the right leads within such massive data sets?

Sometimes you get a gift. When we worked with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) on the Panama Papers or the Paradise Papers, we got this absolute mountain of information. But even then, we had to spend months and months sifting through it to find the little nuggets that were relevant to our country or the people we were investigating.

So it's not easy. There are several ways to go about it. If you know there are big companies with a track record of not being that ethical, you start checking around; you start looking at their annual reports. But in the end, it's not just about documents. You have to find people.

You have to find people inside these companies or people who have left these companies. If there are rumours that people are dissatisfied with how things are going, that's what you need. You need people to point to where you should be digging.

In Bangladesh, finding insiders willing to speak can be extremely difficult, especially in investigations involving powerful political or financial actors. How should journalists approach this challenge while ensuring sources remain safe?

In many stories, I've had the honour of training journalists in Bangladesh since 2019, and I've seen many excellent stories, especially in television, where they use anonymous sources. They talk in shadow, sometimes with changed voices, but they come forward with great documents and great information.

"In fact, almost every investigative story I was shown during my training had anonymous sources. They really weren't anonymous in the sense that, yes, the public doesn't know their names, but they were real characters. They came forward; they talked; they expressed their anger.

Look, it's not easy. But how do police investigate organised crime? Sure, they look for evidence and bodies, but I've done many books on organised crime, and the police rely heavily on informers and snitches inside. That's almost the only way you can really dig through these systems.

Investigative reporters can sometimes become emotionally invested in a story. How can journalists avoid jumping to conclusions too early?

The problem with all journalists, especially investigative journalists, is that you can't fall in love with your story. As excited as you are, you can't dream about awards, front-page headlines or prizes you might win.

You might be sure in your heart that the target of your investigation is guilty, that they are corrupt. So what? I don't care. You have to be cold and dispassionate and be willing to kill your own story.

There are investigative teams that actually create rival teams inside the same newsroom. One team investigates while another team plays devil's advocate and tries to shoot the story down.

The "blue team" digs away and says, "We've got the goods." Then the "red team" comes in and asks: "Really? How do you know that? What's your source for that?"

It's hard to see the problems in your own story.

I'm probably best known in Canada for an investigation into a wrongful conviction. A young boy had been accused of murder and jailed. Decades later, he came to us as an adult and father wanting to prove his innocence.

We spent at least a year investigating. I remember telling my team: "Let us try to prove him guilty." Only after checking everything and failing to prove him guilty did we begin to believe he might actually be innocent.

You always have to ask the other question. Maybe there's another reason the money was transferred. Just because something happened doesn't mean it's criminal. And even if it was criminal, was it intentional?

Do not fall in love with your story.

Long-form investigations require time and resources, but most reporters also juggle daily newsroom assignments. How can journalists develop investigative stories alongside routine reporting?

It's very difficult. In the end, at some point, you have to investigate full time.

But even when I was working on one investigation, I was always beginning to dig around for the next one. Good daily reporters often spend their spare time, weekends or late nights digging into stories.

Eventually, you go to your editor and say: "I know you want me to cover the cricket match, the tax reform and the elections. But I've been working on this for a few days, look what I found."

You plant the seeds, and they can grow into an investigation. You do need time to hunt for those seeds, but eventually you also have to fight for the proper time and resources to pursue the investigation seriously.

Bangladesh continues to struggle with weak institutions and political polarisation. How do you view the country's institutional safeguards for journalism and accountability?

It's hard.

Bangladesh is not a dictatorship. We're not talking about Russia or North Korea. But it's also not a fully functioning democracy with a strong civil society.

In Canada, we have laws that protect journalists. We have institutions. The police cannot simply do anything they want. We have a relatively strong legal system and a robust media structure with lawyers ready to fight for press rights.

Without a strong civil society, it becomes very difficult.

The problem in Bangladesh is that you don't really have fully independent institutions. There aren't independent media councils. The Anti-Corruption Commission is not really functioning effectively.

And yes, political partisanship is very evident. I think there are a lot of political biases in the media.

But at the same time, Bangladesh has many strong media houses and many dedicated, determined journalists. So I think there is hope.

It becomes a virtuous circle. Good journalism helps inspire strong civil society, and strong civil society, in turn, helps protect good journalism.

You mentioned during the panel discussion that a media organisation's credibility can sometimes matter more than an individual investigation. Why is credibility so crucial?

Because credibility reinforces itself.

You build credibility by doing good investigations. Then the more good investigations you do, the more credible you become. And the more credible you are, the more people believe your reporting — but more importantly, the more people come to you with information.

If you're known as a cowardly media house, politically biased, or simply protecting one political party, who's going to come to you with sensitive information?

But if you're known as honest, dogged and willing to take on everybody regardless of politics, then you earn respect. And people will come to you with the dirt.