What is investigative journalism?

[Silent Snob]

What is investigative journalism?

What function has investigative journalism?

What is investigative journalism? And what isn't?

Are there examples of who/what is an investigative journalist and who/what isn't?

What would be the opposite of investigative journalism? And how can it be known as such?

Could there be something like "fake" investigative journalism? What if so, who/what would that be and how can it be necognized as such?

..............

Thank you in advance for answering the questions.

[downbeatplumb]

Investigative journalism

Where news is looked at in depth evidence garnered, witnesses questioned facts ascertained by the journalist.

They investigate.

The opposite would be just reporting every piece of unfiltered rubbish that they see, usually off t'internet without checking its true. See your presidents preferred news sources for examples of these.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Homework assignment, is it?

Boru

[Silent Snob]

What is investigative journalism?

What function has investigative journalism?

What is investigative journalism? And what isn't?

Are there examples of who/what is an investigative journalist and who/what isn't?

What would be the opposite of investigative journalism? And how can it be known as such?

Could there be something like "fake" investigative journalism? What if so, who/what would that be and how can it be necognized as such?

..............

Thank you in advance for answering the questions.

Investigative journalism

Where news is looked at in depth evidence garnered, witnesses questioned facts ascertained by the journalist.

They investigate.

The opposite would be just reporting every piece of unfiltered rubbish that they see, usually off t'internet without checking its true. See your presidents preferred news sources for examples of these.

Thank you for the answer.


What do you mean by "see your presidents"?

How is the "in depth evidence garned"? By what means/methods?

Who/what does the fact-checking? And how does that process work?

How and by what means can it be assured that facts are facts and therefore true?

How can it be known who is an investigative journalist and who is not?

---

What is investigative journalism?

What function has investigative journalism?

What is investigative journalism? And what isn't?

Are there examples of who/what is an investigative journalist and who/what isn't?

What would be the opposite of investigative journalism? And how can it be known as such?

Could there be something like "fake" investigative journalism? What if so, who/what would that be and how can it be necognized as such?

..............

Thank you in advance for answering the questions.

Homework assignment, is it?

Boru

What do you mean by "homework assignment"? You're assuming I'm a student who got some homework from some teacher and I'm asking for answers here?

What if I'm just asking for the sake of asking to get some answers? So we can start a discussion about it? Could that be also a possibility? And if so, wouldn't that be some fine discussion, then?

[downbeatplumb]

Thank you for the answer.


What do you mean by "see your presidents"?

I had assumed you were an American, I may be wrong. But Trump in a bold move has decided not to listen to his sercurity services and gets all his "facts" from places like breitbart and some man he met down the pub.

How is the "in depth evidence garned"? By what means/methods?

Imagine a way to gather information, done it, good, those are what I meant.

Who/what does the fact-checking? And how does that process work?

Someone says something, then you go out and see if it is true by whatever means, if it relates to a document check the document if t relates to an incident check the incident happened with evidence that supports it.

How and by what means can it be assured that facts are facts and therefore true?

It is worrying that people don't know how to check for truth. First, what is the source, is it a respected source of news, do they have a history of being right. Then is the source backed up by evidence. Are there multiple sources of the facts, does it meet with what is generally known. etc etc.

How can it be known who is an investigative journalist and who is not?

People who do investigative journalism are investigative journalists, people that just make shit up or publish unsubstantiated rumour are not.

[Silent Snob]

What about so called trusted journalists and the media/papers/news-channels who haven't been caught making up stuff yet and are therefore considered as trustworthy?

How can one know for sure what is "true"? In what context is what considered a true/real facts?

Wouldn't a free press require certain conditions for investigative journalists to freely report? And what would be considered as a free press? IOW, what are the pre-conditions of a free press? And what isn't?

.........

Sorry for asking more question. But they just came up in my mind.

[chimp3]

"Investigative journalism" used to be known as "journalism". 

"Journalism is to politician as dog is to lamp post." - Mencken

[Jesster]

If we told you the answer to these questions, how could you ever possibly trust us? How could you know for sure that we aren't passing you fake information?

[Silent Snob]

"Investigative journalism" used to be known as "journalism". 

"Journalism is to politician as dog is to lamp post." - Mencken

Not neccessarily. There are fashion-magazin journalists, journalists who write for the daily local news-paper, etc.
But I know what you mean. When I was asking about "investigative" journalism, I was asking about those outlets/magazins/news-channels that are into putting together the pieces of a bigger picture of the world we are living in.

I was especially asking about what the pre-conditions are in which real/actual/serious investigative journalism would be considered as such, in which it can and will investigate some "real" stuff, and by that getting its job done. Which are, according to you and your sources?

---

If we told you the answer to these questions, how could you ever possibly trust us? How could you know for sure that we aren't passing you fake information?

That are some fine questions, indeed.

I would say, if we first establish what the pre-conditions are, in which a free press can properly function, which isn't something that is in the realm of (mere) information, but would be considered as a concept/idea/ideal, then we can proceed from there?

How about that?

[downbeatplumb]

"Investigative journalism" used to be known as "journalism". 

"Journalism is to politician as dog is to lamp post." - Mencken

Not neccessarily. There are fashion-magazin journalists, journalists who write for the daily local news-paper, etc.
But I know what you mean. When I was asking about "investigative" journalism, I was asking about those outlets/magazins/news-channels that are into putting together the pieces of a bigger picture of the world we are living in.

I was especially asking about what the pre-conditions are in which real/actual/serious investigative journalism would be considered as such, in which it can and will investigate some "real" stuff, and by that getting its job done. Which are, according to you and your sources?

Reputable news sources are ones that have gained a reputation for correct stories and providing clear evidence in support of them.

I'm not sure what you aren't getting here.

Facts in journalism are the same as facts in anything else. They need verifiable supporting evidence and the ability to be checked and verified.

You keep asking the same questions getting the same answers then doing it again.

This seems a common thing theists do, trying to get an answer they can attack, is that your game or is English not your first language.