Investigative Journalism Being Reborn Through the Web? 265
Combating the stigma that investigative journalism is dead or dying, the Huffington Post has just launched a new venture to bankroll a group of investigative journalists to take a look into stories about the nation's economy. "The popular Web site is collaborating with The Atlantic Philanthropies and other donors to launch the Huffington Post Investigative Fund with an initial budget of $1.75 million. That should be enough for 10 staff journalists who will primarily coordinate stories with freelancers, said Arianna Huffington, co-founder and editor-in-chief of The Huffington Post. Work that the journalists produce will be available for any publication or Web site to use at the same time it is posted on The Huffington Post, she said. The Huffington Post Web site is a collection of opinionated blog entries and breaking news. It has seven staff reporters. Huffington said she and the donors were concerned that layoffs at newspapers were hurting investigative journalism at a time the nation's institutions need to be watched closely. She hopes to draw from the ranks of laid-off journalists for the venture."
The Huffington Post? (Score:4, Informative)
You can't take the Huff seriously. IT's a political shill site.
Shattered Glass (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0323944/ [imdb.com]
Shattered Glass is a film about how an investigative journalist, Adam Peneberg, working for Forbes.com in 1996, exposed journalist Stephen Glass for plagiarizing nearly every article he wrote for The New Republic, a well trusted and highly respected journalistic publication.
This was considered one of the first major breakthroughs for online journalism and it happened in 1996. Online news has been filled with investigative journalism for a while.
Even wikileaks can be seen as legitimate investigative reporting and whistle blowing. http://www.wikileaks.org/ [wikileaks.org]
Re:Err when did it die? (Score:2, Informative)
The basic issue in the US is the partisan nature of both politics and the media
Agreed, and The Huffington Post is widely regarded [washingtonpost.com] as a left leaning blog. I think objective journalism [wikipedia.org] died long before investigative journalism. I would love to see some great, old fashioned, investigative journalism, but I fear it would be extremely biased in today's media outlets.
Re:Investigative? (Score:3, Informative)
Is it left-biased, or reality biased? It seems a lot of people that smear the current American left, have been living in the right wing bubble for the last few decades, and can't fess up to the reality bias that reality has.
Only in American can I consider myself, a centrist progressive. The state of politics here is severely depressing, so anything that pulls us out of the childish, conservative, backward looking rut we've been in, is a plus in my book.
Reality is how you spin it. Sure, MSNBC can interview two documentary producers to appear non-biased, but treat them both very differently. HERE [newsbusters.org] is an example.
Yes, NewsBusters is a "right-wing" site, however, they do post the entire transcript so you can make up your own mind.
Additionally, Hall offered almost no tough questions, instead tossing softballs such as "What is your observation, having been [to Afghanistan] recently, regarding the Obama administration's plans?" Uninterrupted, Greenwald was allowed to later assert, "Well, again, remember that many people there believe that troops are not the answer. Troops contribute to the problem." He also instructed that the U.S. should send 17,000 teachers instead of soldiers. At the close of the interview, he complained, "But, I think we all get trapped in, as one of my friends in Afghanistan said, 'Shoot first. Think later.'"
In contrast, on January 9, when MSNBC host David Shuster interviewed John Ziegler about his movie on the media's treatment of Sarah Palin, the anchor got into a heated argument with the filmmaker, repeatedly challenging the "conservative documentary's" thesis and deriding, "John, you and Sarah Palin can't take any responsibility for the fact that she wasn't prepared to run for vice president."
Is it really a journalists job to state as fact that Sarah Palin wasn't prepared to run for VP? Regardless of your "opinion" of Sarah Palin, it's just that, an OPINION, and JOURNALISTS shouldn't be spouting theirs. It's not their job.
Re:Investigative? (Score:4, Informative)
That reality thinks that universal health care is good?
Umm. That's correct. Or is the rest of the world not proof enough for you? You know, the world in which everyone else spends less, per capita, on healthcare than the US while covering more people?
That taxing is generally the best solution instead of cutting programs?
When did that become an either-or decision?
Can someone explain this to me?
Okay, let's see, examples:
1) Evolution is real and happens, creationism is bollocks.
2) Sex education is good, abstinence-only education does not, and has never, worked.
3) Government involvement in industry (regulations for safety, to avoid systemic risk, etc) is, in fact, sometimes a good thing.
4) Government *can* provide useful services that private industry cannot, or cannot offer cheaply and effectively (healthcare and related social safety nets, various infrastructure development, etc).
That's just a few off the top of my head. I'm sure you can come up with others if you just think about it for a few moments.
Re:Investigative? (Score:5, Informative)
So why did Obama keep on so many of Bush's economic team? Geithner for example got a promotion from Goldman-Sachs to Bush's TARP administrator to Obama's Treasury Secretary. I'd suggest that there are not quite as many differences between the two parties as many on both sides like to pretend there are. Both are in favor of crony capitalism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crony_capitalism [wikipedia.org] Your (and since you're just repeating the party line here your party's) attempts to place blame on a fantasy deregulation straw man are... unconvincing to those who do more than accept your play on class warfare chords. Both sides are to blame for allowing so many unproductive ventures to survive for so long on the backs of the productive members of society. One of my favorite pieces on the framework for the current crisis (over last 30 years) is this one: http://www.portfolio.com/news-markets/national-news/portfolio/2008/11/11/The-End-of-Wall-Streets-Boom [portfolio.com]
Parent is true (Score:5, Informative)
Parent is not flamebait as the Huffington Post actively works to censor comments [nationofcriminals.com] it doesn't like [blogspot.com] and then outright bans [wordpress.com] the user [youtube.com].
So yes, the Huffington Post does appear to be be a shill site [amazon.com] and this attempt at investigative journalism should not be taken seriously [democratic...ground.com].
Re:Err when did it die? (Score:5, Informative)
There's still PBS. Frontline does great investigative reporting all the time with new episodes most weeks.
Mod parent up! Unfair, opinion moderation (Score:3, Informative)
You can't take the Huff seriously. IT's a political shill site.
He's not the only one who feels that way. Allow me to quote Wikipedia:
The Huffington Post (often referred to on the Internet as HuffPost or HuffPo) is an American liberal[1] news website and aggregated weblog founded by Arianna Huffington and Kenneth Lerer, featuring various news sources and columnists. The site covers a wide range of topics, including sections devoted to politics, entertainment, media, living, business, and the green movement.
Please read the bold part. Parent stated fact and was downmodded for it.
Mods based on opinion have no place on slashdot and are against the moderator guidelines. The Mod should have posted a reply if he/she disagreed rather abusing moderator power.
Re:Parent is true (Score:4, Informative)
Anyone who claims HuffPost isn't 'biased' is themselves nicely biased.
Re:Investigative? (Score:5, Informative)
I don't have a source, but I always assumed the line "reality has a liberal bias" was a satirical reference to the phrase "reality-based community", which entered the popular lexicon via a Ron Suskind article entitled Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush [nytimes.com]. The relevant grafs:
Whenever someone tells me that they think the phrase "reality-based community" is an example of the smug and snide attitude of liberals, I direct them to that article.
Re:Investigative? (Score:3, Informative)
I'm sure many right wing type people will dismiss your remark out of hand without considering it for a moment, but consider:
1) Which nation did this huge economic disaster start? America, a country that had been under complete Republican rule for 6 of the last 8 years and had undergone many deregulations over the past three decades which directly contributed to this crisis.
BZZZTTTT! Wrong! First, Republicans never really controlled anything. Remember "Jumping" Jim Jeffords? He was the Republican who turned Independent to give control of the Senate back to the Democrats after the first Congressional election of Bush's term. Even the next election when Republicans took control of both houses, they only did by a couple of votes and couldn't pass anything without Democrats filibustering it. The next election, Democrats took over congress right about the time the economy tanked. You could just as easily blame congress as the President. Seeing that Congress writes and passes the budget, I think they should take more of the blame, if blaming someone is your goal.
As for deregulation, where did the problems start? Banking? Sure. Who was in charge of the Banking committee when the banks started failing. I'll give you a hint. It rhymes Dodd and Frank [dailyworld.com] (neither of which are Republican).
2) Which European countries have most felt the economic fallout of this? Iceland and Ireland, the two most free-wheeling democracies in Europe. For years Republicans would use Ireland as an example for us to follow since they had the lowest commercial tax rates in the world. Since Ireland's economy has been in free-fall I haven't heard Republicans mention them at all (I wonder why?).
Does Bush run the Irish economy as well? I had no idea. It would appear to me that the problem is that economies grow and shrink naturally. We are in a shrinking trend right now.
3) Which European countries have been effected least? Spain and France due to their more conservative banking regulations and greater safety net for people living there.
Spain and France were in the tank long before this recession hit. You could say that they led the pack.
The first top economic adviser to Bush 43 resigned shortly into Bush's first term because he was simply ignored and believed their economic policy would be disastrous (paying for wars with tax cuts was an extremely bad idea). It's hard to argue that he was wrong now (it really was even then...).
First, the economy did very VERY well during Bush's first six years (minus the 9-11 recession and the recession he inherited). As for paying with wars with tax cuts, national receipts went UP after tax cuts. If the economy sucked, how do the feds raise receipts after a tax cut? Hmmm... Seems as if the facts disagree with you. Maybe you should get away from the mirror and go back and retake Intro to Economics. You might also want to brush up on recent history as well.
Here [heritage.org] is a chart that proves what I just said. You will clearly not a drop in tax receipts ending around 2002 and then a sharp increase of government revenue AFTER BUSH'S TAX CUTS!
So please, tell me genius, if the economy sucked during Bush's eight years, as you stated, how was there an increase in tax revenue when taxes were cut? I LAFF [wikipedia.org] at your ignorance of how economies work.
Re:Investigative? (Score:2, Informative)
Wikipedia says that he worked at an investment consulting firm in 1985, but it is likely that he was an analyst, not a quant (based on the timing and the description of the firm...):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_F._Geithner#Early_career [wikipedia.org]
Starting in 1988, he held various public positions. The previous Secretary of the Treasury, Hank Paulson, was at one time CEO of Goldman Sachs, perhaps you have your wires crossed?
Re:Journalists protection (Score:3, Informative)
how would they propose to protect the whistleblowers?
I refer you to the Fund for Independence in Journalism. A legal defense fund for small, aggressive media outlets. They take donations.
http://www.tfij.org/ [tfij.org]
Started by Chuck Lewis of the Center for Public Integrity after the Center spent over a million dollars fighting libel cases. They have never lost a libel case, but pretty soon their libel insurance company dropped them. Their opposition spent 3 million litigating a single case. Scary.