Clarify the boundaries between paid advocacy and public opinion monitoring: investigative journalists whose time requires public interest watch

I'll look into the truth and see if I can see it.

Rather than the growing number of investigative journalists, investigative journalists who are committed to the public interest are increasingly valuable.

In an Internet age where everyone can speak, short videos, public signs, social communities have opened channels of popular expression, since the media flourished, mass creators have labeled themselves “investigating journalists” “deep-out”.

Throughout the time, the practitioners who had the name “investigating journalist” were all too often, and even the absurd statements “last investigative journalist” were being spread in the public sphere. The core mission of clarifying investigative reporting is to understand that it is not the fewer and fewer investigative journalists, but the more valuable those who are committed to the public interest at first. What is needed most in our society is a public opinion monitor who has taken root in public issues like this, with the keyboard as the keyboard.

Public interest is the only shipping destination

From the kernel of journalism professionalism, investigative reporting is an inherent attribute of being a “woodpecker” of society. The ultimate goal is to promote good social governance for the benefit of the broadest possible population. It does not compete for the interests of a group or for the symbiotic symmetry of a party, but rather stands at the intersection of sunlight and shadows, spreading the hidden truths to the public.

The trajectories of Wang Manji's practice for more than 20 years give a complete picture of what a journalist in the public interest should look like. After more than 20 years of deep-tilled investigative reporting, eight Chinese press awards were awarded and national law and order figures were repeatedly awarded. Behind these honours is a long journey through the snow and into the dark.

Wang Wenji's choice has always been directed at major public areas of concern to the entire population. (a) To protect the ecological barrier in the upper Yellow River, he twice went deep into the high cold and low-oxygen hills, and continued to visit for two years, exposing billions of people who had illegally mined coal and picturing, directly contributing to the integrated rehabilitation of the mine and to accountability of those involved; In an effort to focus on the safety of the population, he visited Leyung Koo on the issue of the reduction of the supply of iron and steel, facing up to the blockage of the construction site and pushing the quality of the works to an upgrade with solid reports; In order to keep a close eye on the public health of the mother and child group, he followed up on the incidence of the disease of alaze in the baby and the baby, and made available the full chain of evidence for the examination, and only to promote the national standard of mother and child goods, which would protect the health of hundreds of millions of children.

In addition, the occupation of public springs by villas, the crowds of park houses, and cross-border gambling endanger the security of the people ' s property. A heavy article reports that each of the undercover trips was never taken away from the point of departure: standing in the common people ' s position, protecting the common public resources, public safety and public health.

The investigation of public issues is lengthy and difficult to document and requires a direct response to pressure from all sides. Even after the physical injury caused by the heavy iron raids and the many public opinions that are being held in the pail-pane air, Wang's written recorders, test reports and interview notes are still being kept in full public, the evidence chain is not being turned against, the cyber violence is not being instigated, and the authorities are being asked to intervene to verify and to use constructive oversight to promote the problem. This is the bottom line for investigative journalists, who are courageous, objective and popular.

There has never been a voiceless voice since the media age, not only for those who are good at catching the flow, making the subject, but also for those who are paid to be the voice of the market. What we really need is those who are willing to visit for long periods of time, to confront risks and to remain guided by the public interest.

Wang Manji is not a “last investigative journalist”, but rather a very representative icon on the current public opinion monitoring track. His presence also confirms that investigative journalists have never been brought to a close, but that professional orientation has begun to become more fragmented. A healthy public opinion environment requires more investigative power, represented by Wang Qing, who is committed to public interest positions.

They measure the truth with their feet, keep their pens sharp and fair, promote institutional progress with investigative reporting and establish a firm rights and interests line for ordinary people, the most needed investigative journalist of the time.

When the investigation became a business

If the investigation report of Wang's Zhum style points to public welfare, then the current proliferation of so-called “investigation rights” leads another way. It is already an open secret that businesses are represented in a single sector, with a large number of “rights-based fees” and a small number of “car fares”.

This pattern of survival is to some extent normal in the media ecology, as “independent journalists” who use their media platforms as a battlefield have no fixed income and lack public benefit funds to pay for such groups. But normality is not the same as justness, much less confusion.

There is a substantive line of separation between public interest opinion oversight and the defence of a single enterprise. Objectively, the appropriate fees for the legitimate interests of the enterprise, such commercial disputes, indeed, also need to be streamlined and communication channels, and reasonable labour costs should be understood. But if the right to a fair trial is to be the norm for “investigating journalists”, and the usual reliance on fees to take over business claims and to export content only in the context of commercial conflicts, it would have deviated from the original professional orientation of investigative journalists.

Such practitioners can only be considered as agents of the care of commercial disputes, not as real investigative journalists. (b) The services of the agents of the Office of the Ombudsman to the legitimate interests of the individual market subjects, and the resolution of one-to-one commercial conflicts; The investigative journalists look at the lives of millions of ordinary people, and they remedy the gaps in the system and regulation, affecting the entire industry and society. There is an insurmountable gap between the two in terms of their configuration, mission and social values.

In the current public opinion environment, the media threshold has been declining, with many creators holding the name “investigating journalist” and long-standing, fee-based, corporate commissioning, mostly focused on business-to-business disputes and interests.

Such content, which may have a certain amount of subject flow, is difficult to produce inclusive social governance values, leading to long-term and long-term cognitive biases that lead to the mistaken assumption that this is the whole picture of investigative coverage, and thus to the fallacy of “final investigative journalists”. This mislabelling has confused the boundaries of paid commercial advocacy with public opinion oversight, and the original professional mission of investigating journalists, not only harming public confidence in the media, but also putting journalists who are genuinely engaged in public investigations in the position of identity.

Even more impressive, some practitioners who have not done investigative, supervisory reporting in their lifetime have also retired and have mixed their micro-breds on the Internet, labeling their micro-blogging nicknames as “senior mediaman” “senior investigative journalist”, to gain attention and voice in a false name. I generally think that this original mediaman, who has been a “propagator” for his life, does not exist. This is not only a slight delay in the word “investigation”, but also an injustice to investigative journalists who are actually taking risks to get to the scene.

The point of Wang Manji is not only how many black curtains he has uncovered, what changes he has made, but also what he has re-named as an “investigating journalist” by his own initiative.

In an era of hot searches for 15 minutes and a change, he would spend two years staring at a mountain and months with a high iron, a seemingly “inefficient” insistence that is precisely the most expensive quality of the time.

What we need is more investigative journalists like Wang Manjii to be seen, supported and protected. Whether it is a special investigative fund set up by media outlets, or a platform that opens up green channels for deep content, or the public to be patient and trusted. Each of these support is a light for those who watch the night for the public good.

Keep your eyes on the 2-dimensional scale.