| Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Current Events > Topic: Maybe There's Hope for Journalism After All |
Topic: Maybe There's Hope for Journalism After All
| Author | Message |
| keltoi2 | Posted – 10/16/2007 12:21:24 PM | show profile Since the US News Media basically bailed on its responsibility to the American people for much of the past 6 years, the country's been in desperate need of a viable alternative, since the few small, brave investigative journalist outlets out there don't have the funding to truly be heard. Yesterday NYTimes writer Richard Perez-Pena reported that a group called Pro Publica, lead by former Wall Street Journal editor Paul Steiger and created and bankrolled by Herbert and Marion Sandler, will assemble a full-time group of investigative journalists "to do long-term projects, uncovering misdeeds in government, business and organizations." ?Both my father and my older brother always focused on the underdog, justice, ethics, what?s right,? says Mr Sandler in the article. ?All of my life I?ve been driven crazy whenever I encounter corruption, malfeasance, mendacity, but particularly where those in power take advantage of those who have few resources.? Using the power of the media to fight for the underdog, justice, ethics, and what?s right instead of sucking up to the rich and powerful and pandering to the basest instincts of the masses--imagine that. Heck, maybe it'll catch on. |
| reporterwriter | Posted – 10/16/2007 7:45:11 PM | show profile Maybe there's hope for parachute investigative journalism. |
| Doc19 | Posted – 10/16/2007 10:08:44 PM | show profile what is "parachute investigative journalism?" |
| chucho | Posted – 10/17/2007 1:58:40 PM | show profile One thing I don't understand: why does investigative journalism need special bankrolling? Journalists just need to do their job, which includes juggling short term hard news with longer term investigative pieces. Actually, I don't think journalism has lost all hope. I think television and radio journalism is mostly beyond redemption, but there are lots of print and online journlists doing some amazing stuff. Good example: Watch Frontline's fascinating documentary on Methampetamines (it's available for viewing online). This one journo at the Oregonian took Microsoft Excel and statistics on violent crime arrests and made a direct causal link to a rise in arrests and the gradual spread of meth production from the West coast eastward. Everywhere meth labs were beginning to pop up there were were spikes in violent crime arrests. His graphs were amazingly detailed and completely accurate and discerning. This journo isn't devoted to full time investigative work; his award winning investigative piece he did was just part of his daily job as a journalist. Nevertheless, if Pro Publica does good work, then it's a good thing -- though it does sound a little NGO-ish (not necessarily a bad thing, but not exactly the same as journalism). |
| keltoi2 | Posted – 10/17/2007 2:41:05 PM | show profile You cite an encouraging example, chucho--and a fascinating insight on his part, by the way. But it's a telling statement on the sorry state of journalism today that such a group is needed. Most investigative journalism takes a lot of time, with very little "payoff" for the media involved--and great risk of ticking off advertisers or powers that be, so with bean counters ruling so many media companies these days, more and more media outlets are just sticking with the cheap, fast, gossip and "he said, she said" pr-release school of crap journalism. |
| Metro Writer | Posted – 10/17/2007 4:57:24 PM | show profile Parachute journalism is jumping in when you don't know the territory. For example, your newspaper sends you to Dogpatch to cover a school shooting. You have to find sources, get the background, size up the situation, etc. You do your research at the airport, in the car, at the local hangouts, etc. |
