Perhaps one of the most important talks I heard when training to become a professional journalist at Cardiff University was by the well respected professor and national journalist Ian Hargreaves. His lecture focussed on the ethics of being a reporter and the pitfalls of shining a light into the affairs of those who would rather they remain in the dark.

In his book Truth or Dare Hargeaves argues our core duty is to “hold power to account and to provide the resources of information and opinion upon which democracy thrives.” However, he also warns, “journalists are not lone rangers with a pocket full of silver bullets; they are individuals working within an understood economic,cultural and political framework.”

This is often a difficult balance to strike as a journalist when deciding whether to publish information which on the one hand will help to stop corrupt practices, but on the other hand may stir up a hornet’s nest.

With this in mind I conclude that proper research, contextualisation and the right to reply are the core three principles when writing and publishing investigative journalism. Once the story hits the streets, the truth of it will normally be arrived at by the majority of readers.

For many years the trade press in signage, and the majority of the wider business-to-business industry, has shied away from investigative stories which highlight corrupt or fraudulent practices. This is necessarily because the business model relies on news which, while contextualised, is strongly influenced by advertising spend and focuses mainly on the positives, leaving little room for investigation.

In regards to SignLink I would like continue to build a balance of news which not only shows off the best in our industry and provides need-to-know information, but also exposes practices and businesses which hurt it.

To this end I would like to thank you, our readers, for the information you send me on a daily basis and urge you to continue coming forward to help us shine a light into the dark.