​Few sportswriters share the same level of dedication to investigative journalism as Don Van Natta Jr. A Pulitzer Prize winner, he has produced several long-form, significant stories since joining ESPN in 2011. Last month, Van Natta re-signed with the Worldwide Leader on a multi-year contract, ensuring that one of ESPN’s most trusted reporters remains on staff. We recently spoke with Van Natta about his career, investigative journalism, and his forthcoming book about Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones. The biography, titled The Star, is slated for release in August 2027. Note: this interview has been edited and condensed for length and clarity.
Congrats on the new contract. What does this deal signify for you? Van Natta Jr.: It means everything. ESPN’s commitment to investigative reporting—from the moment I joined the company in 2012 to today, nearly 15 years later—is extraordinary. In an era of newsroom cutbacks, ESPN has continued to invest significantly in journalism, especially investigative reporting. It’s a vote of confidence in the work I do, and in the work that all of us do. As you know, we brought in six Washington Post reporters earlier this year, and they’ve since become my esteemed colleagues. That says a great deal about ESPN and its dedication to journalism. It’s also part of the company’s DNA to pursue groundbreaking work. I’m thrilled for the opportunity to keep doing what I do for ESPN.
Which of your ESPN stories are you most proud of? Van Natta Jr.: I’d have to point to the Jerry Jones profile I produced in 2014. I spent months with Jerry in the spring and summer of 2014, which culminated in a piece titled “Jerry Football.” That work eventually led to a book I’m writing now—a biography of Jerry for Simon & Schuster. Another achievement I’m particularly proud of is my investigation into the 1973 Battle of the Sexes tennis match between Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs. I received a tip that Riggs threw the match due to a gambling debt to the mob. It sounded almost absurd, but I pursued it and published a story called “The Match Maker” in 2013, which made a compelling circumstantial case that Riggs threw the match.
What’s the most common misconception you encounter about investigative journalism? I hear a lot of people assume that investigative reporters bring opinions to their work, that they approach investigations with a preconceived notion, or that they seek facts only to support a desired conclusion. Nothing could be further from the truth. That stereotype is fundamentally mistaken. There’s also a troubling blurring between opinion and news, and, too often, between hard news and hot takes, which leads people to confuse a provocative viewpoint with someone who’s doing investigative work, sometimes for search-engine optimization. In reality, investigative reporters strive to uncover facts, verify them rigorously, and present findings that withstand scrutiny, even when the conclusions are uncomfortable or challenging.