Abstract
One of the primary objectives of studying theory and practice relating to technical reports is to define what constitutes report writing as genre and to place this genre within a social context. Report writing always involves the investigation of an ill-defined problem and occurs within the auspices of an organizational context. This investigative and reporting function implies a high degree of ethical and social responsibility on the investigator to interpret and report the significance of the facts, making the conclusions explicit, and forming the basis for additional interpretations. Drawing on Susan Wells' conventions for commissioned reports, this article analyzes how the Tailhook Report, which was commissioned to investigate the charges of sexual misconduct by naval aviators at the Tailhook Symposium, omits answering two of the three questions Wells establishes as necessary by precedence in the genre in order to avoid making conclusions that might necessitate actions that would alter the male-dominated power structure of the U.S. Navy.