Comments on: Who pays for investigative journalism?

By: jason brown

jason brown — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 01:08:38 +0000

…

Hm. I assume it’s okay with our free marketeers here that Rail and Air swallowed up a billion or two of public funds not so long ago?

But it’s “drible” to suggest that a few dozen – gosh, maybe even one hundred – million be invested in independent public media monitoring issues like – say – billions spent on Rail and Air.

I dunno. For me, I think we need a BBC model where journalists get paid to ask the big questions, and the legal muscle to ask them.

Questions like, using the rail and air example again – who does the money go to? What are their connections with political parties, if any?

Stuff like that.

After all, as Transparency International says, we are first equal with Finland as the least corrupt countries in the whole world!

Surely it makes sense to protect that perception by actively funding investigative journalism, help ensure it stays that way.

Yet, cutbacks. Dozens here, tens of thousands worldwide in just the last 24 months.

Journalism in crisis is now being debated worldwide.

Some encouraging signs: Our nearest and biggest trading partner, Australia, has just given the ABC it’s biggest funding boost in a quarter century.

Given that information leadership next door, I think suggestions raised in the column deserve more than free market fundamentalisms. Socialisms like corporate welfare seem okay in other sectors, why not the media?

. . .

…

By: Interesting journalism sites | Knowledge Workers

Interesting journalism sites | Knowledge Workers — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 21:09:28 +0000

[...] Recommended recent taster: Who pays for investigative journalism? [...]

By: Interesting journalism sites you’ve probably never heard of « Knowledge Workers

Thu, 23 Jul 2009 05:56:13 +0000

[...] Recommended recent taster: Who pays for investigative journalism? [...]

By: Julie Starr

Julie Starr — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 20:38:23 +0000

Hi James,

Good points. I don’t know the background of the Watergate affair well enough to determine who said what to whom first, but I thought SAI’s point was an interesting one – that the big whistleblowing kind of investigate journalism is a small part of the overall news diet.

I agree with you about the lack of basic beat reporting and the need for it, and I like it that your comment appears to include beat reporting under the umbrella of investigative journalism. I find myself getting frustrated when we try discuss the future of news in blanket statements such as ‘we need more investigative journalism’, ‘we need more quality journalism’ and ‘we must protect the future of democracy’.

We need to be more specific in my view, break it down more, talk about what kinds of stories are important, to whom, why and how to get those stories to people in the digital age. And, of course, how to pay the journalists. Certainly the non-profit model such as the Scott Trust, which publishes the Guardian, is appealing. But do you know any news-mad philanthropists in New Zealand?

By: James Hollings

James Hollings — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 09:25:25 +0000

An interesting debate – can I point out that I don’t think the guy is right who says Felt went to Woodward. From what I’ve read about Watergate Bernstein nagged Woodward until he approached Felt. Yes, Felt was upset about Nixon’s attempt to politicise the FBI, and yes he did seem to use the media to strike back, but so what? Do whistleblowers’ motives matter, if what they say is true?
And yes, I agree we need some kind of alternative to the present funding models. Perhaps a non-profit trust like the Guardian or something like the Washpo. There is a scary lack of basic beat reporting in nz papers now, because the corporate duopoly doesn’t see it as a ratings winner. But it’s essential in all sorts of ways. Another vital thing for investigative reporting, in my experience, is giving reporters space to publish stories that will attract reader concern – this generates the dynamic and often the information that leads to bigger things. Take Watergate again; I think you can make a good case that the news stories gave Nixon’s opponents in Senate the ammunition they needed to launch the inquiries that had the power to subpoena witnesses, and from there it snowballed.

By: Bill Bennett

Bill Bennett — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 11:08:29 +0000

I’ve just read a two-year-old article in Wired by former Talking Heads front man David Byrne who dissects the potential new business models for musicians. I don’t think it holds the answers for newspapers and journalists, but it’s a good starting point for us to figure a way out of the maze.

I’ve written a small piece on my site: http://is.gd/rKJn

The original story is: http://is.gd/pSsz

By: What would a UK-based ProPublica look like? « DAILYMAIL.ME

What would a UK-based ProPublica look like? « DAILYMAIL.ME — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 05:55:40 +0000

[...] Yesterday, Journalism.co.uk published comments from New York University (NYU) professor, Jay Rosen, and ProPublica’s managing editor, Stephen Engelberg, as well as from Jarvis in a feature looking at the sustainability of ‘lump sum’ funded journalism – they all said that the point was not to look at ‘one solution’ but at a hybrid of funding opportunities (an issue picked up by Julie Starr here.) [...]

By: Julie Starr

Julie Starr — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 17:47:43 +0000

Know what you mean Fraser! But I also understand how temptingly simple the government bailout option seems in the face of so much uncertainty and change in the news business. He’s not alone. There are voices all around the world who are conflating, wrongly in my view, the future of newspapers with the future of journalism. Not long ago a UK politician started calling for a bailout for newspapers there. I wonder how long before one of our politicians stands up and asks for the same thing here?

By: Fraser

Fraser — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 13:45:37 +0000

I have just read Alan Cocker’s drible in the NZ Herald editorial and it saddens me that he takes such an old school response to new media changes.

Government funded news bailout. What a cop out. No thanks Mr Cocker.

By: What would a UK-based ProPublica look like? | Journalism.co.uk Editors' Blog

Mon, 06 Apr 2009 13:26:54 +0000

[...] Yesterday, Journalism.co.uk published comments from New York University (NYU) professor, Jay Rosen, and ProPublica’s managing editor, Stephen Engelberg, as well as from Jarvis in a feature looking at the sustainability of ‘lump sum’ funded journalism, who all said that the point was not to look at ‘one solution’ but at a hybrid of funding opportunities (an issue picked up by Julie Starr here.) [...]