Hacker News Reader

Comment by taeric | Hacker News Reader

Same. Feels a lot like insider gossip that thought they had more going for themselves?

That said, "It’s a radical idea, but we could make meaningful progress if we clawed journalism from the hands of affluent, out of touch brunchlords, and put it back under the control of diverse, hungry journalists and editors who actually understand the news industry and media environment they work and exist in." is also a rather boring take? What do they want to make "meaningful progress" on? I certainly can't see "journalism for journalism's sake" as a good thing. Seems more likely you will get gatekeeping and another venue for activism?

View on HN

In my opinion, "journalism for journalism's sake" would be what we call reporting the truth, or investigative journalism. Is there a national outlet that invests in pure investigative journalism anymore?

If you're looking for investigative journalism The Intercept isn't a bad read

That is the noble way to consider it, but as soon as something starts existing for its own sake, you start losing the reason the thing was enacted the first time.

I'd hazard the "pure" journalism you are seeing in your mind likely wasn't nearly as pure as you'd think it was. There is a reason a lot of very long lived scandals have always been the case. Even more true as you consider news crossing country boundaries. Any specific examples you have in mind?

>> What do they want to make "meaningful progress" on? I certainly can't see "journalism for journalism's sake" as a good thing. Seems more likely you will get gatekeeping and another venue for activism?

> In my opinion, "journalism for journalism's sake" would be what we call reporting the truth, or investigative journalism. Is there a national outlet that invests in pure investigative journalism anymore?

Investigative journalism can still amount to "gatekeeping and another venue for activism," if the investigative attention is selective and focused (more or less) to support one or more activist programs.

That's actually the most effective kind of manipulation, because it's simultaneously true and misleading.

And I also think that's close to what we've got. To really be "journalism for journalism's sake," I think you'd have to allocated investigative resources roughly equally among factions, with investigations focused on "pro-narrative" ideas and "counter-narrative" ideas.

The big stories used to be broken by local newspaper reporters. That process has been deliberately broken by private equity.

So... No, sadly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com