Secret Commissions: An Anthology of Victorian Investigative Journalism ed. by Stephen Donovan and Matthew Rubery (review)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reviewed by: Secret Commissions: An Anthology of Victorian Investigative Journalism ed. by Stephen Donovan and Matthew Rubery Ann M. Hale (bio) Stephen Donovan and Matthew Rubery, eds., Secret Commissions: An Anthology of Victorian Investigative Journalism (Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview, 2012), pp. 311, $34.95 paperback. In his 1886 Contemporary Review essay “Government by Journalism,” W. T. Stead likens the work of an effective journalist to a drug: “Every day he can administer either a stimulant or a narcotic to the minds of his readers; and if he is up to his work and is sufficiently earnest himself, he can force questions to the front which, but for his timely aid, would have lain dormant for many a year.” The crusading journalist and editor certainly stimulated the minds of readers with his 1885 exposé “The Maiden Tribute of Modern Babylon.” The report of Stead’s “Secret Commission of Inquiry” created a sensation and made him famous (or infamous). Stead’s “Maiden Tribute” was a key example of the nascent genre of investigative journalism, which was an essential part of the development of the popular press in the nineteenth century. To date, however, nineteenth-century investigative journalism has received insufficient scholarly attention. Stephen Donovan and Matthew Rubery’s intriguing collection Secret Commissions: An Anthology of Victorian Journalism helps bridge this lacuna by collecting examples of the genre well before its presumed origin in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Donovan and Rubery’s enjoyable, albeit brief, anthology illustrates that the techniques Stead adopted to probe and expose the sexual exploitation of underage girls were far from new in 1885. Stead’s “Maiden Tribute” is one of nineteen selections that Donovan and Rubery have assembled to elucidate the development of investigative journalism between 1849 and 1904. The anthology’s scope is limited to pieces published in England that have “an investigative component conducted by an identifiable individual and narrated in the first person” (18–19). The “Introduction” effectively sets the stage and positions the development of investigative journalism within the context of media history. Organized chronologically, each selection in Secret Commissions is accompanied by a brief introduction, which usually includes background on the periodical of initial publication; a suggested reading list; and numerous, primarily definitional footnotes. Illustrations or photographs accompany five of the selections, creating opportunities to explore the confluence of documentary image and text. The collection is rounded out with a brief list of recommended readings. Secret Commissions is primarily a textbook, and, in deference to the needs of the classroom, selections are brief and tend to be excerpts. Sensational subjects—drug use, infanticide, dogfighting, prostitution, and sexual exploitation—should resonate with students, even if the grandiloquent, overly literary writing style of journalists like Stead may be challenging. [End Page 152] Other topics, such as the working poor, the prison system, living and working conditions, and domestic service, may not be as sensational, but they should evoke comparison to contemporary social conditions. A key strength of Secret Commissions is that the content resonates with a range of disciplines, from media studies to literature, from history to gender studies, and from documentary studies to creative-nonfiction. It introduces students to several seminal Victorian works, such as W. T. Stead’s “Maiden Tribute” (1885), James Greenwood’s “A Night in the Workhouse” (1866), and George Sims’s “How the Poor Live” (1883). Pieces by well-known figures, such as Stead, Dickens, Mayhew, Sims, and Greenwood, appear alongside some relatively unknown writers, such as “A. B.” and Herbert Cadett. Each item in the anthology is based on the originally published text rather than a subsequent revision or collection. As such, Secret Commissions is firmly rooted in periodical studies, although summary information about each publication tends to be skeletal. An appendix with key facts about the represented periodicals would have been a useful addition. Overall the excerpts selected by Donovan and Rubery are tantalizing and should stimulate interest in further reading. Those without access to electronic databases or rare periodicals, however, may find it challenging to finish reading a series in its original context, which to a certain extent undermines the emphasis on the original source. When selecting material, the editors consciously strove to balance gender...
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".