ProPublica -- new investigative journalism org.
I'm interested and hopeful about ProPublica, a new non-profit investigative news organization. Paul E. Steiger, former managing editor of The Wall Street Journal, will serve as president and editor-in-chief.
ProPublica, when fully staffed in 2008, will include 24 fulltime reporters and editors, the largest staff in American journalism devoted solely to investigative reporting. ProPublica will be supported entirely by philanthropy and will provide the articles it produces, free of charge, both through its own Web site and to leading news organizations selected with an eye toward maximizing the impact of each article.Link (Thanks, Paul!)Commenting on the new organization Mr. Steiger said, “ProPublica will focus exclusively on journalism that shines a light on exploitation of the weak by the strong and on the failures of those with power to vindicate the trust placed in them. We will be non-partisan and non-ideological, adhering to the strictest standards of journalistic impartiality and fairness.” He continued, “We will look hard at the critical functions of business and of government, the two biggest centers of power. But we will also focus on such institutions as unions, universities, hospitals, foundations and the media when they appear to be exploiting or oppressing those weaker than they, or when there is evidence that they are abusing the public trust.”
the latest
latest episodes
This is wonderful. I really hope this lives up to its mission statement, because they are setting a very high bar.
This looks excellent, however I'm always skeptical of news organizations that are "supported by philanthropy." Many philanthropists who support media outlets are simply rich neocons buying public opinion.
And what about those of us who think the strong are supposed to exploit the weak? Where do we go for news?
#3: Duh? FOX.
I hate to sound pessimistic, but, having a little trouble with the idea that some Wall Street Journal Philanthropists are going to be struggling for the downtroden by investigating "Government", "Union", "University" and "Media" wrong doing. If they are only twenty times as hard on corporations as the WSJ, it really won't be enough.
#4: Don't forget MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, NPR and most of the Associated Press.
Brand name media has been seriously lacking in investigative reporting for years. You only get one sided stories that pander to particular points of view and anything that doesn't fit that point of view is discarded (or simply not investigated). American troops who commit a war crime get front page news and hours of airtime but American troops who get the medal of honor get put somewhere in the Metro section and maybe a brief mention on the air. (American troops who accomplish missions and do a great job only get mentioned in the press reports of independent reporters...)
My hunch is that the philanthropic funds have their origin in -- wait for it -- the type of corporations that ProPublica pledges to investigate. How long will the philanthropic funders allow ProPublica to bite the hand that feeds it?
My hunch is that the philanthropic funds have their origin in -- wait for it -- the type of corporations that ProPublica pledges to investigate. How long will the philanthropic funders allow ProPublica to bite the hand that feeds it?
I'm glad to hear that something like this is taking shape, and I hope that it does good work. That said, people could easily do their own investigative reporting if they wanted to.
I mean, if people can come to gether to create something as complex and powerful as some of the stuff that we get out of the open source software movement, surely people can do a similar thing in other spheres of human endeavor with similar results.
People aleardy create tons of content and put it on Youtube and other sites. It's a matter simply of changing the mindset of these content producers from trivial to serious.
@pyros -
You reckon that "people could easily do their own investigative reporting if they wanted to". I wish you were right, but sadly I don't think you are. For a start, serious investigative reporting ain't easy - it's not just a case of having an opinion or being a whistleblower. It takes real expertise, rigour, skill, tenacity, an ability to write - not to mention courage and resourcefulness. And as for YouTube etc, I'm afraid that currently it's all part of the problem rather than part of the solution - there's so much dross, trivia, conspiracy-theory drivel and general sloppiness that anything of value, revelatory truth etc is not only very rare and hard to find, but devalued by the company it keeps. That said, the whole 'open source' culture can only be a good thing - but alongside it, the world needs the kind of focused expertise that hopefully ProPublica wil deliver.
But we will also focus on such institutions as unions, universities, hospitals, foundations and the media when they appear to be exploiting or oppressing those weaker than they
Sounds Scaife-like in its breadth.
Heywood Broun would be proud of the idea, but until the project is up and running, he'd probably agree with much of the skepticim expressed here.
"ProPublica will focus exclusively on journalism that shines a light on exploitation of the weak by the strong and on the failures of those with power to vindicate the trust placed in them. We will be non-partisan and non-ideological"
Not to be impish, but how is the exploitation of the weak by the strong non-ideological?
I think all news outlets should be non-profit. In fact, that's one of the many changes you'll see when I'm declared dictator-for-life of the United States.
And yeah, "citizen journalists" are a major part of the problem. They just add idiotic noise and rumormongering. Once again, I have to agree with the Cult of the Amateur guy's central premise, in stark contrast to the views of some of the contributors to this site.
Pros are better than amateurs. It's a generalization, I know, but generalizations are meant only to be generally true.
Nonesuch (6): And newspapers ought to report more "Dog Bites Man" stories, right? War crimes don't get reported as often as they should.
Kyle: Bad reportage is bad reportage, and good reportage is good, regardless of whether the reporter got paid for it.
War crimes get reported every time they're found out about, so I'm not sure what you're wanting, Teresa.
What we need is more reporting of the successes, which are entirely ignored outside of independent reporters.
Nonesuch, you mean there should be more reporting of our successes in Iraq? If so, I have bad news for you ...