But Who Will Do Investigative Reporting Without Newspapers?
from the someone-will-find-a-way... dept
Pat was the first of a few of you to send in this amazing investigative report done by the folks at The Smoking Gun, outing a bunch of "griefers" who go by the name Pranknet and who have caused a tremendous amount of trouble and damage throughout the US with their phone-based pranks. The story is fascinating for a variety of reasons, and well worth reading, but it (once again) highlights the fact that detailed deep investigative reporting isn't something that only newspapers can do. The reporters from TSG went well-beyond your typical investigative report as well. Rather than just outing the "leader" of the group, they tracked down numerous accomplices (many of whom insisted they couldn't be found) and outed them all. Apparently police and the FBI had been trying to track down members of this group for a while, but some good old investigative reporting -- from a website -- beat them to it.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: griefers, investigative reporting, pranknet
Companies: the smoking gun
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
IR
Investigative reporting by mainstream media has become something of a joke in recent years, because too many stories get canned or rewritten by special interests. True IR can only be done by independent organizations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Modern SO-Called Journalists.
Unless something just "falls into their laps", the so-called "newspeople" are going to go hunt anything down themselves. Sometimes, it's the station management that is too CHEAP to actually pay the gas to go drive to a story. I witnessed a utility pole falling and blocking a section of a street next to the mighty University of SC. It just fell on it's own from rot. Called Channel 10 on my cell (this thing was blocking the road/narily missing a car)..It was a Sunday morning I called. GOt a dude in Master Control. He not only 1)Didn't have a newscrew OR even a free-lancer available, he 2)Wasn't going to call one even though the story was only 5 BLOCKS from the station's backdoor and the real kicker 4)He admitted his management didn't want to piss-off either the power company (who's pole it was) OR putting USC in a "bad light". In other words, PROTECT the Status Quo!. I told him in disgust that it was too BAD no one got KILLED by the pole so WIS would get off their dead-asses to cover it.
I called the three other stations and NONE of them would dispatch. I finally got intouch with a couple of online publications however. They got a pix of it, wrote the story, AND added the obvious question "How many MORE utility poles are unsafe SCE&G??? (This was tied in with the fact South Carolina Electric and Gas had charged ratepayers extra to hire a company just to inspect ALL poles in the SC Midlands nary 10 months before)..
TO get a Journalism Degree now is like the old General Studies program alot of colleges had. It's for those too lazy, undisciplined, and/or STUPID to go into business or even teaching!..ESPECIALLY if you're a hot-looking Bimbo who's only asset IS her looks. But it's the way of life. When an individual or business starts just "phoning it in" (going thru the motions), there forms a vacumn someone else finds an opportunity..
Right on BLOGGER!!!!..Keep up the spirit of Ben Franklin and Thomas Paine..The PEN/Keyboard IS mightier than the sword!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
News
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When will TSG do their next investigation? A few days? Years? Who knows. This may not be something done with the intention of breaking the news, rather a couple of guys pissed off who want to know who it is behind these pranks. Will they ever "investigate" anything again?
It's the same as my opinion of pro versus amateur reporters, videographers, etc. When it's raining, when it's cold, when it's too far away, the amateurs stay home and the pros go do the work. Would TSG spend as much time investigating backed up sewers or a line painting contract that had a kickback in it? Probably not. A pro would do their job and investigate whatever is next. Amateurs do it as a hobby. The results are often interesting, but rarely consistant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
There will be a period of time when the traditional news organizations reorganize and attempt to find a profitable happy medium that we will see some types of reporting drop off. During that time it will be left to the amateurs to fill the gap. Yes a pro does it consistently but if hes not getting paid to do it he wolnt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
What Mike knows and doesn't want to admit is that the public only changes (telegraph to telephone, example, or buggy to car) when the alternative is more compelling, a better economic value for the customer, and most importantly, when it can actually replace the existing service / product.
Ditching all the newspapers because TSG did some "investigative journalism"? Not likely. Replacing pro services with spotty amateur coverage? Not likely either.
It would be like someone pointing to steam powered "cars" and saying this is the future. We haven't seen the future yet, but steam powered investigative reporting isn't it, I am pretty sure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
It's the Newspapers that have been saying how invaluable and irreplaceable they are, Mike's just saying "Uh, no your not" and giving examples.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The point hasn't been missed, you're making an additional point. The original point: without newspapers, who will do investigative journalism. The response: on-line news will, and here's an example. You now introduce a NEW point, asking how reliable they will be.
It seems here, that the Smoking Gun (1) traveled not only across the country but INTERNATIONALLY to chase their story, and (2) they were highly successful at making contacts, following leads, uncovering information that the Federal Bureau of Investigations could not, and writing a comprehensive and well thought out story. At no point did they need to do any of that, the Smoking Gun is doing well enough as it is with TV deals and one of the top news sites on the Internet today; but they did do it, did it well, and will learn and do it even better next time. They are motivated to do it for the same reasons the print newspapers are motivated to do it, so your "amateur" argument doesn't hold because they did not behave as "amateurs" but are proving themselves to be the new "pros", while the old "pros" are proving to be the new "amateurs".
So, what we have here is proof that (1) newspapers dropped the ball on a huge story, (2) an on-line source picked up the slack and was able to conduct a thorough and successful investigative report, and (3) their business model allows them to give it away for free to readers and financially support the report, reporters, & site.
You can keep your blinders on, but here is a clear-cut example of why newspapers themselves aren't NEEDED. Most newspapers don't do ANY investigative reporting, or even have field reporters on staff anymore. The big papers (NYT, WP, BG) SOMETIMES, MAYBE conduct an investigative report if it's big enough, falls neatly enough in their laps, and doesn't piss off the advertisers or anyone the editor in chief likes. What we have shown in this story is a return to true investigative news reporting, for the love of the sport.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I've read two thorough and well written investigative reports in the past month written by so-called "amateurs" that in terms of their investigations went deeper than the old media did, and did a better job writing their articles than the "pros".
I haven't seen a good investigative report come out of a major newspaper in that time. In fact, in light of some major non-newspaper broken stories, particularly in the Madoff case, that reporters even KNEW about what was going on, but DIDN'T report on it.
That's how awesome old media newspapers are at investigative journalism. It doesn't even need to be raining to get them off of a story. That's what separates the "pros vs Jos" ...
"When it's raining, when it's cold, when it's too far away, the amateurs stay home and the pros go do the work." But when it's sunny, warm, and close-by, the pros take the day off and go do something else instead.
Unfortunately, it doesn't rain as often as it's sunny, so the pros get more time off.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
No he didn't. Your point is a different one - interesting, but different. Do you know why Mike gets to decide which is THE point, and which is not? Because it's his blog, and that was his article.
So, since he wrote the article on his site, it is you who has missed the point. If you would like to determine what the point is, you should start your own blog.
Now, in arguing against your interesting point: true that TSG may not do a subsequent IR, but others will. Maybe the crowd can, and maybe the crowd cannot replace the paid journalists, but it certainly can augment, fill in the gaps, and tap into far more investigators than traditional journalism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ed Hardy Shirts
Ed Hardy is a tool. Ed Hardy is a tool. Ed Hardy is a tool. Ed Hardy is a tool. Ed Hardy is a tool. Ed Hardy is a tool. Ed Hardy is a tool. Ed Hardy is a tool. Ed Hardy is a tool. Ed Hardy is a tool. Ed Hardy is a tool. Ed Hardy is a tool. Ed Hardy is a tool. Ed Hardy is a tool. Ed Hardy is a tool.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I mean the top members of Pranknet all live at home with their moms, or they're almost twice as old as the ones that live at home with their moms ... I doubt any of them have touched a breast, let alone found a woman to allow them to put their penis anywhere near them.
You'd figure with that large of a group of Mama's Boys, they'd be a little more sensitive to embarrassing women in public.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The medium is irrelevant
Again, it all boils down to individual talent and the means to support it. If you look at the Pulitzer winning work over the years, you'll find projects that took multiple hundreds of hours of labor. I don't doubt that someone working for free could replicate that effort, under the right circumstances. But I don't think that we'll see much volume if we're relying on volunteers. So the issue isn't who's going to do investigative journalism, or how the work will be distributed. The issue is how it's going to be financed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The medium is irrelevant
Yup. I agree with you entirely... but I don't think it's that "big" of an issue. I think there are plenty of business models to pay for investigative journalism, and one of the points we keep making here is that we're seeing a bunch of them pop up already.
At the same time, it's worth noting how little is actually spent on investigative reporting by newspapers today. The big newspapers (including yours) may have decent budgets for that sort of thing, but even they're pretty limited.
How many big investigative reports does a newspaper really break a year anyway?
We're seeing lots of new models show up, and there will be plenty of ways to finance such investigative reporting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The medium is irrelevant
Big news organizations can afford that kind of inefficiency (or at least they could back in the day) because they have a large staff of folks producing stuff on a daily or near daily basis. Investigative work is just one element in a stream of content. My hunch is that investigations will continue to be subsidized, rather than being a self-sustaining endeavor. That ties into the larger question of how companies will be able to afford to generate content that is unusually expensive to produce if the monetization models for journalism online are weak. If you attract as much or more traffic by breaking a story about the Octomom than you would by spending four months studying the declining health of the world's oceans, and everything revolves around traffic, why would you invest in the latter? It enhances the brand, true, but is it worth the money? I really want the answer to be yes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why newspapers matter
But how often has the Smoking Gun produced these long stories? Once in a blue moon. That's because they're a Web publication with a small staff.
Despite what you might think, newspapers are consistently producing investigative stories like this that require a lot of time and money.
No one is saying newspapers have a monopoly on watchdog journalism. But newspaper reporters are the ones who do it most often. That's why the decline of newspapers really matters.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]