According to Lincoln Steffens, one of the most influential muckrakers of the Progressive Era, the overarching purpose of muckraking journalism was far more profound than merely exposing societal ills. Steffens viewed muckraking as a purposeful illumination of the pervasive corruption embedded in political machines, business monopolies, and various public institutions. The aim was to pull back the curtain on abuses of power that were often hidden from the average citizen, with the hope that shining light on these shadows could stimulate a collective awakening and spark demands for reform.

Rather than limit their work to shock value or sensationalism, muckrakers aspired to engage the moral conscience of the American people. Their investigative reporting served as a catalyst for social and political change by making complex issues accessible and urgent to the public. By methodically documenting injustice and providing tangible evidence of wrongdoing, muckrakers intended to galvanize public opinion, transforming passive discontent into active demands for legislative reform. This was more than exposé; it was a clarion call urging Americans to hold their leaders accountable and participate more vigorously in democratic processes.

Steffens believed that journalists played a dual role—as both informants and advocates for the disenfranchised. They were tasked with giving voice to those marginalized by economic inequality, political corruption, and social neglect. By exposing systemic problems, muckrakers empowered citizens with the truth, encouraging them not only to recognize the existence of corruption and injustice but to demand transparency and change. This empowerment was integral to the Progressive Era’s larger goal of creating a fairer, more equitable society.

The implications of muckraking journalism during Steffens’ time were significant for the relationship between the media and government. Traditionally, the press maintained a deferential stance toward political powers, often acting as their mouthpiece. Muckraking challenged this dynamic, positioning journalists as watchdogs who scrutinized government and business leaders relentlessly. This adversarial stance unsettled prevailing narratives that favored elite interests and forced public officials to confront scrutiny and reform demands.

In assessing whether muckraking fulfilled its mission, it can be argued that while it achieved remarkable successes—such as influencing antitrust laws, food and drug regulation, and political reforms—it also introduced complexities. The intense focus on corruption sometimes fed public cynicism and distrust in institutions, which could complicate governance and social cohesion. Nonetheless, Steffens and his contemporaries fundamentally transformed journalism into a tool for democratic engagement, transparency, and social justice, leaving a lasting legacy that redefined both the media’s role and the public’s expectations of their leaders.