In the wake of the media frenzy over President Obama's statement that the Cambridge Police Department "acted stupidly” in arresting Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. — and Obama's subsequent apology and official 180° on the issue — we at OhMyGov! got curious about the influence of press coverage on recent government events.

At the risk of stating the blindingly obvious, the media is in a never-ending dance (some may call it a war) with governments and the officials who lead them. When scandals or even minor faux-pas break, the news coverage prompts quick reactions, and sometimes outright reversals, by gov officials.

To measure just how much effect the media has on shaping policy, I checked online newspaper archives from a large geographic sample to find out how many articles they published only to publish an article the next day with an official statement from the government that disowns its own actions. Not just “damage control” — where they modify the official position while keeping the same core ideas — but actual reversals of policy, solely in response to investigative journalism.

What I found in looking back through just the months of June and July in the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the Chicago Tribune, the Los Angeles Times, and other local newspapers in Arizona, Nevada, Texas and New England yielded surprising results. Over 40 unique stories (covering separate government-related events) saw the local or federal government responding as early as the next day with comments repudiating actions it had taken that were subsequently reported upon.

To give a few examples: On June 14, the Arizona Daily Star reported that DUI traps would be placed in fast-food drive-thrus. The source? The Pima County Sheriff's Department's DUI unit supervisor. Two days later, the DUI unit supervisor's supervisor made an official statement saying that the plan was scrapped and that “the program never had the support” of the Sheriff's Department.

Another more recent case comes courtesy of the Baltimore Sun. On July 20, the paper reported that the Maryland Transit Authority sent an internal memo regarding the legal plausibility of audio surveillance on buses and trains. But the next day’s paper had this to say: “After inquiries from The Baltimore Sun Monday, [MTA] acting Secretary Beverly Swaim-Staley ordered the request withdrawn,” claiming that the proposal “was not properly vetted.”

In Florida, it's even getting pre-emptive. The story “Florida Town Manager Marries Porn Star” didn't even get a chance to come out; instead, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution had to content itself to report that the Fort Myers Beach man was fired for the press coverage they thought his new adult film actress wife would generate. The irony, of course, is that the firing has created more media interest than the original story — Mayor Larry Kiker has already had to do over 30 interviews about it as of July 23.

These specific examples demonstrate just how much influence the media has on government policy, and the connection can be made to extended coverage of broader issues like national security or health care. Mind you, this is only the old-school print media, too. Anyone who watches cable TV news or even just network news knows how simply bringing embarrassing or ethically questionable things the government does to light can create a hailstorm of inquiry and apology, clarification, or outright turnaround on issues as big as CIA torture briefings or as small as a couple of throwaway words in a press conference.

There's a reason Edmund Burke, in the wake of the French Revolution, looked up in the House of Commons at the press gallery and said, “Yonder sits the Fourth Estate, and they are more important than them all.” The press is our unelected official, our self-styled vox populi and a deeply divided body. Its influence is far greater than any individual participant in the electoral process, although with the rise of blogs and broadband Internet access, the distinction is blurring between citizen and journalist.

It is perhaps more important now than ever, as our very governmental operation is being reshaped by the dumbfounding amount of information available to the general public. Sifting through the voluminous reports to find the critical details, setting the proper context, finding the unreported story — these traditional press roles are getting harder but are no less essential. Constant questioning and verification are necessary now more than ever when everything said or written can have a slant or agenda and no one can know how influential it will be. The responsibility lies with us as citizens dedicated to making our country better not to be led blindly by either the government or those who may lead the government. The foundation of democracy depends upon it.