Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

All the investigative journalism I know about exists mostly in dirty "lefty" or "Centrist lefty" orgs like NYT, WaPo, Reuters, etc.

All the "righty" or "conservative" orgs i know about are mostly opinion pieces.



view as:

Beware filter bubbles. If you're in the Blue Tribe bubble then you'll see conservative sources, but only when they're saying something contentious if not blatantly false (and so you'll also only see the Red Tribe sources who say such things), because that's what causes fellow Blue Tribe members to bring them to your attention.

I openly admit im fairly left wing, But I also can not think of a single serious major investigative right-leaning news org.

I'd love counter examples, This is not about filter bubbles.

EDIT: on Further consideration, the Wall Street Journal and the Economist might qualify, but they typically don't seem to do expose pieces.


Reason, Cato (especially worthwhile: https://www.cato.org/people/julian-sanchez), The American Conservative, they exist.

Even Fox News does some actual investigative reporting, notwithstanding that most of their airtime is spent on opinion and propaganda.


"Even Fox News does some actual investigative reporting, notwithstanding that most of their airtime is spend on opinion and propaganda."

I actually read Fox News daily for a few months to try and see this, but I didn't, and eventually stopped after they autoplayed played someone getting fatally hit by a truck on their front page.


Yeah, Fox News is pretty crap in general. You're not going to find happiness on the front page. But there is this:

https://www.foxnews.com/category/news-events/fox-news-invest...

Where you find things like this:

https://www.foxnews.com/us/veterans-face-more-delays-on-agen...

https://www.foxnews.com/us/jon-stewart-burn-pit-victims-psa

It's not sexy contentious lies, it's factual reporting about veterans and 9/11 first responders. So naturally, it doesn't get promoted by algorithms designed to push clickbait to the fore.


I wouldn’t consider Cato “Right

Both of the major parties are Big Tent parties. The Red Tribe institutions that look similar to major Blue Tribe institutions are going to be the ones operated by fiscal conservatives, libertarians, veterans organizations, etc. If you want news from religious conservatives, there is an organizational structure that as far as I can tell has no Blue Tribe analog -- a mostly-decentralized network of localized institutions called churches.

Public schools

That would certainly say a lot about the nature of the fight over school vouchers.

well if you believe in a secular education, go to school. If you believe in a religious education, go to church

That is what they do. But then they want to know why the secular schools get so much more of their tax dollars than the parochial schools they want their kids to attend.

No they don’t. They want access to the public’s money.

It would be more helpful to think of churches/parochial schools as businesses.


They are the public. It's their money.

If parochial schools are businesses then school vouchers are sending retirees social security checks rather than operating state-run homes for the elderly. It allows people to buy what they want in the market (from businesses) instead of being restricted to a choice between a government facility and nothing -- not even a refund of the tax dollars not needed to pay for it when you don't use it.


No, i don’t get a refund from the fire department because my house doesn't burn. An educated populace is beneficial to the nation.

People are free to choose as it is. No reason to provide the public’s democratically distributed money.


>Reason, Cato

Reason and Cato are corporate funded think tanks pushing a corporatist agenda. If you look at CATO's front page piece right now, for instance, it's not an investigation it's an opinion piece on how hard it is to complain in the WTO inspired by their backers:

https://www.cato.org/publications/free-trade-bulletin/trade-...


The point isn't that they never publish an opinion piece, it's that they do publish investigative reporting, like this:

https://www.cato.org/blog/why-nsa-deleting-call-records

You also get pieces like this, which are full of factual information whether or not you agree with their policy position:

https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/new-nation...

And it's hard to see which "corporatist agenda" pieces like this are pushing:

https://reason.com/2019/11/21/with-this-forfeiture-trick-inn...

Which isn't to say that they're unbiased. Everybody has an opinion. But everybody has an opinion; that's why you need more than one news source.


There's massive amounts of special interest money being funneled into publications on every side of issues, local and national. That's the reality we have to live with. See Politico's latest reveal of "dark money" also going toward left-wing policy activism and media coverage [1].

That doesn't mean we should totally ignore what media and think tanks have to say, they can still produce good critiques and investigations -- whether Brookings or Cato. Even explicitly partisan muckrakers like Greenpeace or O'Keefe's Project Veritas occasionally expose a valid case of wrongdoing no one else noticed. These organizations are very selective and hyperbolic in what they focus on, due to their narrow mission and ideology and the natural limit of time/energy, but if you combine all of their varied output you can get enough slices to approximate the pie.

[1] https://www.politico.com/news/2019/11/19/dark-money-democrat...


Reason and cato are not investigative journalism, they are policy research, its not comparable.

No, I mean, what are right wing investigative journalism publishing sources? Can you point me to any?

Well, let's look at the most obvious right-wing publication. Here you go, original news reporting:

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/05/17/exclusive-facebook...

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/06/13/exclusive-facebook...

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/09/12/leaked-video-googl...

I just noticed that they even publish stuff in opposition to Trump: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/12/11/exclusive-text...

Note that I found "right wing investigative journalism publishing sources" to be ambiguous, because you could mean a "publishing source" as in a place that publishes things or specifically that you want a list of references as found in academic papers or on wikipedia. If I guessed wrongly, perhaps you could clarify.


Legal | privacy