For decades I worked with my fellow reporters producing stories. We would study the patterns in the events we were following, trying to connect the dots so we could beat other reporters to the story.
In the process, there were times that we were tempted to cut corners.
During the process of landing a big investigative story, we usually had identified a bad guy or a group of bad guys who were responsible for the situation we were trying to expose.
As part of that work, we would become interested in the bad guy’s psychology, and on occasion we would consult with psychologists to better understand that.
This was particularly important when we were tracking ongoing behavior, such as a series of crimes by a perpetrator not yet apprehended by the authorities.
So in those cases we were much like cops or intelligence agents, some of whom were often tracking the same targets as we were.
This is how journalists acquire some of their most valuable sources -- fellow investigators with similar objectives, which in all cases is catching the bad guy.
But this is also where problems can develop. One issue is when journalists get confused about whose agenda they are pursuing. As long as there is alignment, there is nothing wrong with a reporter and, say, a D.A. working to break the same case.
But their objectives are different -- the prosecutor is seeking to build a legal case, whereas the reporter is seeking to tell an accurate story.
While its may seem that those objectives are consistent with one another, the devil is in the details. There is a world of difference between what is legally provable in a court of law and what is publishable.
While all of this is happening in real time, any reasonably self-aware investigator starts turning inward to ask a few questions: “Why am I doing this work? Who am I to judge others? Which ends justify which means?”
There are many different possible answers to these questions. All I know for sure is that to continue with this kind of work over many decades, you need to have found the ones that work for you.
Otherwise you will stop.
(This is an edited version from an essay I wrote in 2021.)
HEADLINES:
Trump to address U.N. General Assembly and meet with world leaders as he navigates Iran, Gaza, Ukraine conflicts (CBS)
Natalie Harp Reportedly Showed Trump Critical News Coverage Before Media Ban (Forbes)
Major TV networks stand with CNN, decline to replace its White House pool crew (CNN)
President’s UN trip will not have a TV camera (Axios)
Paramount and state AGs settle lawsuit, allowing Warner Bros. merger to proceed (CNBC)
Paramount wins Warner Bros takeover after settling states, union lawsuits (Reuters)
Newsom Signs Bills Meant to Prevent Trump’s Interference in Midterms (NYT)
ICE officer shoots Venezuelan man delivering food in Austin, lawyer says (NBC)
Trump ally Stephen Miller leads sweeping push to accelerate removal of migrant children (Guardian)
US strikes on alleged drug boats could be crimes against humanity, says UN (BBC)
As Trump and Xi Meet, the U.S. and China Are ‘Shin-Kicking Under the Table’ (NYT)
Russia’s pro-Putin party set to win election as Ukraine exposes war’s growing reach into Moscow (CNBC)
Auto Industry Workers Protest in Germany Against Job Cuts, Industrial Policy (WSJ)
Even Republicans Are Figuring Out That Pete Hegseth Is a Disaster (Nation)
California declares statewide emergency ahead of epic El Niño storms (LAT)
Gates Foundation launches coalition to build more representative language data sets for AI (AP)
Is this how the world ends? Extinction scenarios are taking over the AI debate. (WP)
US proposes AI incident alert system in talks with China, Bessent says (AP)
No comments:
Post a Comment