Pro Publica Restores Nobility To Journalism

On the 4th of July, a day set aside in the United States to celebrate our freedom, I find this a noteworthy post. It's no secret I have been very critical of the state of most American journalism. There are a multitude of reasons for the demise of long held journalistic ideals but I believe the fundamental driver is profits. There was once a time in this country when news was considered a civic duty. And, that making money from the news was not a primary driver. Often times not a driver at all. Indeed idealistic. Idealism is something we could use a lot more of. From my perspective independence in news outlets should somehow be written into law. In other words, major defense contractors and lobbyists in Washington should not be allowed to own one of the largest media outlets in the U.S. as is the case today. Today much of what we witness is Orwellian Newspeak. The potential for conflicts of interest and journalistic integrity are beyond words.

I am constantly searching for what I believe are viable news sources. And, those willing to report the news as the American people deserve it. News with substance on issues that matter. I have added many news links to this blog. One I find very compelling is Pro Publica - a nonprofit news organization. Pro Publica is headed by some very accomplished individuals with tremendous credentials of journalistic integrity. That includes a long time managing editor of the Wall Street Journal.

I have taken the liberty of including some of the text from their 'About Us' page which reinforces the crisis in journalism we now face. I would encourage you to bookmark their site or use the link on my link list to their site.

Pro Publica was made possible by Herbert Sandler and other philanthropists. This is a great act of nobility by those who realize the importance of independent journalism to the future of a free society.

ProPublica is an independent, non-profit newsroom that will produce investigative journalism in the public interest. Our work will focus exclusively on truly important stories, stories with “moral force.” We will do this by producing 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.

Investigative journalism is at risk. Many news organizations have increasingly come to see it as a luxury. Today’s investigative reporters lack resources: Time and budget constraints are curbing the ability of journalists not specifically designated “investigative” to do this kind of reporting in addition to their regular beats. This is therefore a moment when new models are necessary to carry forward some of the great work of journalism in the public interest that is such an integral part of self-government, and thus an important bulwark of our democracy.

It is true that the number and variety of publishing platforms is exploding in the Internet age. But very few of these entities are engaged in original reporting. In short, we face a situation in which sources of opinion are proliferating, but sources of facts on which those opinions are based are shrinking. The former phenomenon is almost certainly, on balance, a societal good; the latter is surely a problem. (In other words, a perpetuation of erroneous information is often being reported as fact and many stories aren't even being reported at all. - my words not theirs.)

Investigative journalism, in particular, is at risk. That is because, more than any other journalistic form, investigative journalism can require a great deal of time and labor to do well—and because the “prospecting” necessary for such stories inevitably yields a substantial number of “dry holes,” i.e. stories that seem promising at first, but ultimately prove either less interesting or important than first thought, or even simply untrue and thus unpublishable.

Given these realities, many news organizations have increasingly come to see investigative journalism as a luxury that can be put aside in tough economic times. Thus, a 2005 survey by Arizona State University of the 100 largest U.S. daily newspapers showed that 37% had no full-time investigative reporters, a majority had two or fewer such reporters, and only 10% had four or more. Television networks and national magazines have similarly been shedding or shrinking investigative units. Moreover, at many media institutions, time and budget constraints are curbing the once significant ability of journalists not specifically designated “investigative” to do this kind of reporting in addition to handling their regular beats.