We survey 462 financial journalists and conduct 18 interviews to obtain insights on the inputs to their reporting, the incentives they face, and the factors that influence their coverage decisions. We report many findings relevant to the accounting literature and identify multiple avenues for future research. For example, financial journalists say the likelihood they write about a specific company or CEO increases when the company is controversial or the CEO has a colorful personality, suggesting journalists gravitate toward provocative topics. We also find that financial journalists routinely use company-issued disclosures and private phone calls with company management when developing articles, and that they believe they are evaluated primarily on the accuracy, timeliness, and depth of their articles. Journalists also believe monitoring companies to hold them accountable is one of financial journalism's most important objectives, but they often face negative consequences for writing articles that portray companies in an unfavorable light.

We investigate ethnic minority and nonminority sell‐side analysts’ participation in public earnings conference calls. We find that minority analysts are underrepresented in conference call Q&A sessions, and minority analysts who do participate on the calls experience lower levels of prioritization than do nonminority analysts. Minority analysts’ lower participation rates are partially but not fully mediated by characteristics such as experience, work environment, and stock rating favorability. Additionally, firm and conference call fixed effects mediate approximately half the magnitude of lower minority participation rates. Extroverted minority analysts participate at higher rates, but the negative association between minority status and conference call participation is exacerbated when calls are more time constrained, when executive teams are less diverse, and when analysts are from less prestigious brokerage houses. Overall, we document the underrepresentation of minority analysts on earnings conference calls and provide evidence suggesting both analysts’ and managers’ choices influence minority analysts’ participation rates.

Whistleblowers are ostensibly a valuable resource to regulators investigating securities violations, but whether there is a link between whistleblower involvement and the outcomes of enforcement actions is unclear. Using a data set of employee whistleblowing allegations obtained from the U.S. government and the universe of enforcement actions for financial misrepresentation, we find that whistleblower involvement is associated with higher monetary penalties for targeted firms and employees and with longer prison sentences for culpable executives. We also find that regulators more quickly begin enforcement proceedings when whistleblowers are involved. Our findings suggest that whistleblowers are a valuable source of information for regulators who investigate and prosecute financial misrepresentation.