Via a joint e-mail exchange, Scott Higham and Robert O'Harrow, Jr. discuss the importance of government sources and the benefits of working as investigative partners at The Washington Post.

EXPOSÉ: The award-winning Washington Post series that you both wrote about homeland security contracting relied, in part, on information you received from sources inside the government. Can you describe the importance of these types of sources in your profession? What motivates a tipster to contact you?

HIGHAM/O'HARROW:It would be much harder -- in some cases impossible -- for reporters to do their jobs without sources who have first-hand information, access to key documents and deep inside knowledge. They help reporters understand how things are supposed to work, why they aren't working and how to document what is going on behind the scenes. Most sources take huge personal and professional risks to come forward, and they are motivated by many different things: outrage at an injustice; anger over their treatment in the workplace. We always consider the motivations of sources as we consider the information they are providing. As important as they are, sources are just one tool in a reporter's kit. To ensure the veracity of the information, tips from sources are aggressively vetted and cross-checked and expanded upon by relying upon other inside sources, public records and internal government and corporate documents.

EXPOSÉ: In the program "Nice Work If You Can Get It," you discuss your frustrations with frequently denied FOIA requests. And Robert says the "government has become almost obsessed with secrecy, and frankly I don't think it's necessarily just for national security, I think it's an issue of control." What's your take on the secrecy enforced by the current administration? Do you believe they are keeping information hidden in order to maintain national security, or for some other reason?

O'HARROW/HIGHAM: Every reporter learns that institutions, both public and private, often rely on secrecy to protect or enhance their own interests. For government officials, the ability to cloak their activities in secret can often enhance their bureaucratic power while shielding them from accountability. Openness of the sort prescribed by federal and state laws is a hassle for people more interested in political or bureaucratic advancement -- and a potential nightmare for officials who are disregarding the nation's laws and values.

EXPOSÉ: You both work together in the investigative department of The Washington Post, and teamed up to write the homeland security report together. What are the benefits of working as partners on a large story like this? Are two reporters always better than one?

O'HARROW/HIGHAM: On a project of this magnitude, the team approach made perfect sense. There are scores of people to interview and thousands of pages of documents to digest. A good partnership like ours gives each reporter the opportunity to share the suffering that comes with reading through thick contracting files -- as well as the thrill of finding flecks of journalistic gold in those files. It also helps to double-team team interviews with certain subjects. We are also fortunate to work with investigations editor Jeff Leen, whose high expectations make our work clearer and more compelling to the readers of The Washington Post. Lastly, many investigations are executed by a single reporter, but those investigations tend to be more confined and targeted to a single subject or area of inquiry.

In 2006, Higham and O'Harrow received the top prize for newspapers of circulation greater than 500,000 in the Investigative Reporters and Editors, Inc. (IRE) investigative reporting competition for their Washington Post series on government contracting, "The High Price of Homeland Security."

More about Scott Higham

More about Robert O'Harrow, Jr.