What is investigative journalism?

[Minimalist]

Could there be something like "fake" investigative journalism?

It's called Breitbart where they make shit up and peddle it to fascist fools.

[Silent Snob]

Could there be something like "fake" investigative journalism?

It's called Breitbart where they make shit up and peddle it to fascist fools.

What would you prefer instead? Not that I think that Breitbart isn't some ...... (fill in the blank), I'm just asking for a better idea. And to clarify my political stance: I'm by no means, by no standarts, in any kind of shape or form, an alt-right-winger. Like totally not. But that does not mean I'm opposing the . In my view there is so much crap out there, regarding "information", and nobody is excluded from spreading mere ideological poo-poo on the information-highway, because I think all do it, to a certain degree.

I haven't read a news-paper completely, or a news-magazine from the beginning to the end for years in a row. It just bores my ass off. And I'm not even a us-american citizen.

So, Breitbart is bad. What's the alternative?

I have no dog in that race. I'm an intellectual stupid by choise. I'm just asking questions. And that I do merely for the sake of.

---

 (Disclaimer: I have to admit I wasn't totally honest about not having a dog in the race. I do have ideas/concepts and even some dogs I, personally" would prefer to run for......(fill in the blank). I'm just sooooo utterly dissapointed by ..... (fill in the blank) that I was unable to not give a damn. So yes, I have two dogs in both of your political partys, over there in us-america. And I'm not telling who they are.)

Back to topic:

What would be a pre-condition for a free press to be able to express itself freely (so called free speech) in order to be able to do its job? What are these pre-conditions?

.........

I'm sorry if I have derailed my own thread. I really am.

[paulpablo]

Is free speech the answer?

[chimp3]

A news consuming populace that demands news based on fact and in depth investigation would go a long way towards inspiring quality journalism. If people demand news that supports their prejudices then they will receive it. Ultimately, at least in free societies, the public pays the salaries of the news media.

[Silent Snob]

Is free speech the answer?

The answer for /to what?

Of course not. Free speech is just for those who can express themselfs by having the means and tools to do so,  and have something to say about the nature of....äh....whatever. And that requires some kind of education, which should be provided for all, if so called "free speech" has any meaning other than .....(fill in the blank).

I'm not writing the m-word. I said, "äh" and "fill in the blank". I sincerely hope you noticed that, companiero Paulpablo.

---

A news consuming populace that demands news based on fact and in depth investigation would go a long way towards inspiring quality journalism. If people demand news that supports their prejudices then they will receive it. Ultimately, at least in free societies, the public pays the salaries of the news media.

That's some fancy statement. I wish I would be fat enough to wear a t-shirt with that slogan. But I'm working on it.

[paulpablo]

Is free speech the answer?

The answer for /to what?

Of course not. Free speech is just for those who can express themselfs by having the means and tools to do so,  and have something to say about the nature of....äh....whatever. And that requires some kind of education, which should be provided for all, if so called "free speech" has any meaning other than .....(fill in the blank).

I'm not writing the m-word. I said, "äh" and "fill in the blank". I sincerely hope you noticed that, companiero Paulpablo.

---

A news consuming populace that demands news based on fact and in depth investigation would go a long way towards inspiring quality journalism. If people demand news that supports their prejudices then they will receive it. Ultimately, at least in free societies, the public pays the salaries of the news media.

That's some fancy statement. I wish I would be fat enough to wear a t-shirt with that slogan. But I'm working on it.

I'm saying a precondition of investigative journalists expressing themselves freely is to have an established rule protecting freedom of speech.

[Silent Snob]

I'm saying a precondition of investigative journalists expressing themselves freely is to have an established rule protecting freedom of speech.

Oh, of course that's one pre-condition, indeed. Sure. No doubt about it, Sir.

And how can so called freedom of speech be secured/applied/sustained/guarantied? In other words, what are the pre-conditions for free speech as such? And what does "free speech" even mean, in the context of this thread's questions? Which is about investigative journalism and its function and pre-conditions.

Know what I'm asking?

Let me then, after having read your comment, re-phrase my questiion: What would be needed and neccessary in order to secure/sustain/guarantie free speech? And what is considerd as free speech? What's its definition?

[paulpablo]

I'm saying a precondition of investigative journalists expressing themselves freely is to have an established rule protecting freedom of speech.

Oh, of course that's one pre-condition, indeed. Sure. No doubt about it, Sir.

And how can so called freedom of speech be secured/applied/sustained/guarantied? In other words, what are the pre-conditions for free speech as such? And what does "free speech" even mean, in the context of this thread's questions? Which is about investigative journalism and its function and pre-conditions.

Know what I'm asking?

Let me then, after having read your comment, re-phrase my questiion: What would be needed and neccessary in order to secure/sustain/guarantie free speech? And what is considerd as free speech? What's its definition?

You're asking questions that would probably be tough for lawyers trained in these subjects to answer, and would probably require paragraphs of writing and clauses and so on.

I'm no where close to be being a lawyer trained in these subjects so the sensible thing is just to say I don't know.

[Brian37]

Walter Cronkite and Edward R Murrow would be examples of objective journalists. Most of cable "news" today is pundits not journalists. Pundits can be considered the "opinion column" of a news paper, but an objective journalist does not argue a position but simply reports the facts they find.

But even with "pundits" there are flat out liars who make shit up because it is good for ratings because unfortunately today we've had 30 years of WWE, Jerry Springer "reality show" garbage. Farts News is not news, it is garbage designed to be a right wing propaganda machine.

[Silent Snob]

---

Walter Cronkite and Edward R Murrow would be examples of objective journalists. Most of cable "news" today is pundits not journalists. Pundits can be considered the "opinion column" of a news paper, but an objective journalist does not argue a position but simply reports the facts they find.

But even with "pundits" there are flat out liars who make shit up because it is good for ratings because unfortunately today we've had 30 years of WWE, Jerry Springer "reality show" garbage. Farts News is not news, it is garbage designed to be a right wing propaganda machine.

Y A W N !