Date Posted:12:50 Author: Hendrik - 16 Aug 2001 Subject: Re: LA New Times is not a "smut" magazine In reply to:
Anonymous - 16 Aug 2001
's message, "Re: LA New Times is not a "smut" magazine" on 12:48
I know Hendrik is not very keen on SRF, so perhaps he was just calling the newspaper that because he heard others who are pro-SRF calling it that and he thought it was true.
Quite so. I do not know the printed edition and have looked over the online version a few weeks ago (after my post) and was astonished to find not two third of it consisting of hate propaganda and pornographic ads as was suggested several times. On the other hand it is clearly not a distinguished newspaper, in fact I distrust it and would not be surprised if the Yogananda article turned out to be baseless; I just found the idea that was put up in the Yogananda article interesting and by itself not that improbable, so I posted the link.
Investigative journalism however is often an euphemism for the intrusive digging in other people's business and the unnecessary exposing of any kind of dirt to the eyes of the public under the pretext of "free information". Please show me an investigative journalistic article that brings out an unexpected positive truth, not a negative 'shocking' one - except those that appeal to profitable mass sentimentalism.
I am sure that in reality many 'investigated' people are pretty average, colorless persons not much would be worth writing about.
