Using Watergate as the benchmark of journalism states only that this specific reporting was confirmed after the event to be revealed as truth. Such a given journalistic stamp of approval is not difficult to find the past 100yrs.
The difference between now vs.’then'(any day past 100yrs), a reader is equipped with more tools to qualify words written/spoken at increased rate of time.
A ‘reporter’ defines nothing, for me. Never has. A person who provides information on a given subject or story–whatever the topic–and proves to be truth for me, the reporting individual has a ‘leg up’, but is not beyond my own ‘fact checking’-should I feel the need.[/quote]
So, in your opinion, the average American reader has the capability to fact check the veracity of any given story and can avail themselves of the same resources as an experienced investigative reporter?
Not delving into journalistic ethics here, or proper reportage (i.e. not only sussing out all of the relevant facts, but ascertaining their place in the overall narrative), but simply focusing on fact checking.
The key facts here would be where you stand in terms of education, literacy and numeracy, and how that differs from the “average” American. The fact that you post on Piggington would probably place you in a higher strata, but that somewhat makes my point for me: A free press is there for all citizens, regardless of rank, income or social class, and, yes, that is being lost.
