By Stephanie Woodrow

Let me tell you a story. It’s about two reporters who received a tip, researched to see if the claim was accurate and pitched it to their editor, who told them to keep digging for they might have a story. They had more than a story – they had a Pulitzer prize winner. The editor was Ben Bradlee; the reporters were Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward; the story was Watergate.

In the wake of the scandal involving former Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fl.) it seems most people are choosing to blame Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and the rest of the Republican leadership. Not to deflect the criticism away from the Republicans, but there are three entities, which if they had practiced true investigative reporting, this “Democratic conspiracy” wouldn’t have unraveled five weeks before the most important midterm election in more than 50 years.

In the fall of 2005, The St. Petersburg Times and the Miami Herald received “overly friendly” e-mail conversations between a former page and Foley. “Maybe it is just me being paranoid, but seriously,” the teenager said. “This freaked me out.”

None of the e-mails was sexual in nature, and the papers deemed the conversations ”friendly chit-chat.” Both papers denied dismissing the story completely – the Times editorial board said it put two reporters on the story – but neither publication ran anything.

Both reasoned that they had neither proof that Foley had sexually explicit or even inexplicit conversations with minors nor a former page who would go on the record saying they had inappropriate conversations with him . They only had proof that Foley was “overly friendly,” which apparently many male pages in D.C. were already warned about. Most editors and reporters would agree that the papers did not have enough information to run a story.

In August, Brian Ross, ABC News’s chief investigative correspondent, received the same tip and e-mails, but pushed it aside since he was busy with anniversary stories about Hurricane Katrina and 9/11. When he finally wrote and posted story about the “friendly chit-chat,” on ABCNews.com people immediately started posting comments on the site, calling Ross “the King of sensationalistic crap.”

Then, the blog Stop Sexual Predators began posting sexually explicit instant message conversations between pages and Foley. Wonkette, Politics for People with Dirty Minds jokingly linked a story to the blog, writing, “Oh, of course they’re not real. But let’s all pretend, ok? ‘Cause it’s better than another damn plagiarism scandal.'” Within 10 minutes, Wonkette received messages confirming the authenticity of the instant messages. Simultaneously, former pages came forward and sent their scandalous conversations with Foley to Ross. All of this occurred within a 24-hour period, and Foley’s office wasted no time in confirming the messages (and subsequently updating their résumés.)

While most have been quick to accept the newspapers’ reasons for not going to print with their non-story, and praise Ross for writing one, the question remains: When did investigative reporting stop including investigation?

Three news organizations knew Foley was close with underage pages, that he spoke with them online, and that the conversations made some pages uncomfortable. That’s enough information to warrant some research.

If it only took 24 hours after the story was first reported to have numerous pages come forward with saved sexual conversations, how did the reporters on this story miss all of these sources?

The most likely answer is laziness. Foley’s homosexuality was one of the worst kept secrets in Washington (and Florida too, according to numerous sources). Everyone on The Hill flirts and goes to happy hour (except for the Kennedys), and members (single or married) flirting/dating/taking an interest in aides, interns and pages is not uncommon. If reporters knew that some pages were uncomfortable with their contact with Foley, some investigating may have given them other pages who were willing to go on the record, and give them a real story.

Why weren’t more former, as well as current, pages contacted? With all of those who have come forward and spoken on the record about Foley’s behavior in the past two weeks, it is hard to image not a single page could have been found three weeks ago.

The St. Petersburg Times, the Miami Herald and Ross should not be let off the hook. They practiced poor journalism and as a result, Foley’s contact continued almost a year after media were aware of the situation.

If reporters are to act as the fourth balance of power, and examine and question government, then reporters must hold themselves to the same high standards, if not higher, than that which we hold politicians to. Lazy reporting doesn’t reflect the high standards the industry has set for itself. It also doesn’t win Pulitzers.