[raffael-vogler]

correctiv.org is producing phantastic investigative journalism on a regular basis. one of their most important revelations recently was about a pharmacist who was selling heavily diluted cytostatic agents for chemo therapy. several people died because of this [1].

really awesome about correctiv is that they not just release their findings - they really make sure that something is going to be done about it. for example the government didn't do much about above mentioned case - they didn't even bother to inform the patients. so correctiv rented a shop in that town (Bottrop) where people could inform themselves about the matter.

if you want to support them: https://correctiv.org/ueber-uns/#unterstuetzen-sie-unabhaeng....

the one thing I find most concerning about these kind of revelations is that it seems that journalism is more and more responsible for work police should be doing.

[1]: https://correctiv.org/ruhr/alte-apotheke/2018/08/10/trotz-an...

[inetknght]

> it seems that journalism is more and more responsible for work police should be doing

I think this echoes a lot of sentiment, if perhaps without concrete evidence, across the world.

How can we solve this?

[ianai]

For people in “democratic” countries, get involved in civic duties. Register to vote, stay informed, volunteer to canvass and spread the word for campaigns. I donate monthly to causes I care about supporting. Corruption reform has taken place through these routes.

Edit-pedantry

[cbnotfromthere]

"For people in democratic republic countries"

So obviously people from the UK, Norway, Netherlands, and Spain should not get involved /facepalm

[longway2go]

First we have to address our ridiculously outdated structure and actually government sanctioned class system.

Having a queen and a ridiculously nationalist political parties has to be the most embarrassing parts of being British.

God (lol) divinely gives power to the queen (lol) through birthrite (lol) and we are her subjects (lol).

It is so deeply offensive that I am meant to he her slave, and its shocking how much idiots dont think it matters.

[marliechiller]

youre not her slave or subject really though are you? you havent been scrubbing her shoes or done anything at the request of the royal entourage im guessing. shes just a placeholder for tradition and has no say in anything. so really, it doesnt matter. stop getting your knickers in a twist over something so unimportant and irrelevant

[buckminster]

The Tories changed this in the British Nationality Act 1981. We are now citizens, not subjects.

[CaptainZapp]

Having a queen and a ridiculously nationalist political parties has to be the most embarrassing parts of being British.

I think Boris Johnson does quite a splendid job in the British embarrassment department.

[Skrillex]

The two (non-mutually exclusive) most realistic options are to:

1) Become a career politician yourself. 2) Put yourself in the top 0.1% wealth bracket, and share your opinions with money.

[mrschwabe]

Embrace the trend and take responsibility for solving unsolved crime and peacefully bringing about justice and/or resolution (ie- inform the uninformed) to the problems for which you have solved.

[throwaway080383]

Nit: it's spelled "fantastic". With the "ph", it made me think of "phantasm", which is a kind of ghost or illusion.

[gamblor956]

the one thing I find most concerning about these kind of revelations is that it seems that journalism is more and more responsible for work police should be doing.

The police are generally bound by procedural rules that prevent them from doing these kind of investigations, especially where much of the direct evidence (or in many cases, the actual crime itself) is based on entrapment.

However, once journalists have done the dirty work, the police can use their reporting to find evidence that would survive legal challenges to the means through which it was collected.

[woodpanel]

While I echo your appraisal, they have a hard time not to come across as biased.

for instance:

- In the article you've linked, I'm sure there were better images of a conservative politician to choose from. Small thing, but not for professional journalists

- In the CumEx-article, what information do I gain, when they state that one of the perpetrator's lawyers is a famous face of the German pro-market party FDP - other than that it's good that they aren't part of the government? BTW this politician is known to be a lawyer for defendants in cases with a lot of press coverage. Is he guilty by association? Is thus his party, the people voting for them?

- Their focussing so much about the new right-wing populist party AfD

And what of course will always make the tinfoil hats spin:

- Being funded (among others) by George Soros

[wemdyjreichert]

Agreed. I understand everybody's got biases, and that many in media lean left. But doing pretty stuff like that, clearly intended to score a few cheap points, might turn many people off some truly high-quality content.

[davrosthedalek]

Agreed, but it goes even further, as it open up attack surface for the other side to discredit a story, and more importantly, the story teller, tainting all future stories. I understand that media writes for their readers, but I think it's a lesson one has to learn to actually affect change and convince the other side.

[pjc50]

There is no such thing as an unbiased press; the choice of what to report and what counts as "news" is inherently an opinion. It is also ridiculous to pretend that there isn't a substantial rightwing bias in a large number of media organisations, through their funding, ownership, and clickbait willingness to support manufactured "controversies" that harm real people.

A latest example: https://www.politico.com/story/2018/10/16/washington-post-lo... "Washington Post told lobbyist: Quit working for Saudis or stop writing for us". Admittedly that's in the "opinion" section, but the line between the two is very thin.

Given this the only thing you can do is find reporting that does a reasonable job of finding the answers, is consistent with your own values, and doesn't have to issue too many retractions for obviously stupid things they got suckered/biased into printing.

The choice between "holding power to account" versus "supporting the existing power structure and its prejudices" is both a key partisan divider and the only reason for press to claim a public interest defence in the first place.

[jfim]

> Given this the only thing you can do is find reporting that does a reasonable job of finding the answers, is consistent with your own values, and doesn't have to issue too many retractions for obviously stupid things they got suckered/biased into printing.

Alternatively, you can just read multiple news sources (ideally some from other countries as well) and compare them on their coverage of the same event. It's pretty enlightening to see what each source covers and what is their take on it.

[stronglikedan]

One of my go-to sites for this: https://www.allsides.com

[everybodyknows]

Coverage by foreign reporters adds another dimension: stories that embarrass both of the domestic political camps. A recent example would be British coverage of a Democratic legislator playing a cell phone game during Trump's address to Congress.