Almost any major undertaking requires free-flowing money. And the more of it you have, the more you can do.
Now even for newspapers that transition to the internet, I suspect that they will still be taking quite a paycut. And with the lower cost of entry, there’s likely to be more news outlets than less, meaning that the money is going to be diluted further. Bloggers are considered to be in the same realm as newspapers even when they simply cut and paste from, or link to, other sources.
Is there any particular hope that the sort of in-depth truth finding that was once profitable will become so again?
Could the rise of the internet explain the polarization of the parties and the wholesale spread of disinformation, in recent years?
Only an opinion but I think what passes for news has changed as more news outlets have been swallowed up by conglomerates with an agenda. Sometimes the agenda may be ideological but often it’s simply money. Viewers are drawn to controversy even if that controversy is manufactured. It leans toward tabloid journalism, rather than real informative factual news.
The other factor is the rising popularity of opinion pieces and the lines between those and actual news being blurred. Create controversy and sensationalism and you don’t have to spend money on investigative journalism. I doubt it will change until the public starts insisting on change and supporting factual informative shows. Perhaps a station could experiment with a show about factually examining the serious issues that concern us. What a novel idea huh?
On a side issue, I think the internet and our easy access to more information will change the level of dishonesty in politics. For now they are still using the same old tired dishonest attacks. I think with this election we begin to see a backlash by more voters , especially the sought after independents, to that kind of uninformative dishonest hogwash.
In-depth reporting was never profitable, it just didn’t matter as much when newspapers were locally owned and passed down from the founder to the next generation. The newspaper was more interested in either furthering a crusade or using it’s award-winning reporting as a loss-leader to draw more readers. If it meant tieing up a couple of reporters for a few weeks or months on a single story, so be it.
If I had to guess, I’d guess that weekly and monthly magazines will take up what’s left of investigative journalism.
Just as long as they understand that the world does not revolve around them and their do-whatever-it-takes, ruin as many people’s lives, so long as they can make a name for themselves as investigatory journalists, no matter how many friends they lose or people they leave dead and bloodied along the way, just so long so they can make a name for themselves as investigatory journalists, no matter how many friends they lose or people they leave dead and bloodied and dying along the way.