Daniel Pearl may be dead. Or he may be alive. We’re not sure, and it seems his kidnappers aren’t either.

The Wall Street Journal reporter was abducted Jan. 23, and last Wednesday an e-mail supposedly from the National Movement for the Restoration of Pakistani Sovereignty was sent to American media outlets and government officials. The e-mail included a list of demands and said Pearl would be killed within 24 hours if they were not met.

On Thursday, after 24 hours with no compliance from the U.S., another e-mail was sent extending the threat another day and reiterating the demands. Friday came, and more e-mails arrived, one claiming Pearl was dead, dumped in a graveyard somewhere. Another demanded money for his release.

So the questions remain, is Pearl dead or alive? Will the people responsible ever be caught?

And why would a man and his wife, who is 6 months pregnant with their first child, put themselves in such a precarious position? Why would they live in Karachi, Pakistan, one of the most volatile cities in the world right now, meeting with Muslim clerics who happen to be leaders of Islamic militant groups?

Maybe Pearl was just asking for trouble.

Or maybe he was doing what any other journalist in his position would have done, given the opportunity – finding the story and getting it out there for people to read.

On Thursday the Daily newsroom was buzzing with a similar journalistic energy, on a smaller scale of course. Finding out about students making fake IDs was just the beginning of a 20-minute period where it seemed there was a new story every time we turned around.

Stories that normally would’ve been used on the front page had to be moved inside to make space for the newer news of the day.

As the Daily’s adviser, Spoon, accurately put it, we were doing some “real newspapering” and it was exciting.

Now I’m not saying any of the stories in Friday’s paper were on the same scale as Pearl’s project, finding the Pakistani ties to alleged shoe-bomber Richard Reid, but they were important for a similar reason – their importance to our readers.

These were stories the ISU community cared about, issues that affected them immediately about people who might live down the hall or next door.

Conrad Fink, former vice president of the Associated Press, calls it the “fire for journalism,” the tingle of excitement that goes through your bones when you find a good story and the adrenaline rush that keeps you going on it even when you’re tired and frustrated and not sure where to go next with the story.

It’s the “fire for journalism” that sent reporters and photographers running toward the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on Sept. 11, capturing the stories and images of a day that has already become a landmark in American history.

It’s the “fire for journalism” that sustained Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein as they uncovered the Watergate scandal, the biggest presidential scandal in U.S. history.

As I sat in the safety of the Daily office on Sept. 11, I asked myself if I would be one of the reporters running toward the horror of the World Trade Center. When I head about Daniel Pearl, I wondered if I would ever be willing to put myself in a position where my life was in danger.

I don’t know whether or not I would rise to the occasion, given the opportunity. But I admire the people who take the risk and get the story so that people have the facts they need to form their opinions and be aware of the world around them.

Horace Greeley, founding editor of one of the first penny press papers, said, “Journalism will kill you, but it keeps you alive while you’re at it.”

This quote gains a new relevance as journalists put themselves in positions where death is a reality. I hope it doesn’t apply to Daniel Pearl.

Andrea Hauser is a senior in journalism and mass communication from Edgewood. She is editor in chief of the Daily.