Have some mercy here cause now I'm in the weird position of having to not just interpret but argue the OP's point. I think the OP's point is that these exposes

Have some mercy here cause now I'm in the weird position of having to not just interpret but argue the OP's point. I think the OP's point is that these exposes are a kind of release that allows those who would otherwise agitate for change do nothing because they get a sense of justice merely from reading such a piece. So the OP is expressing a sort of smug disdain for 'The New Yorker' here because they are complicit in easing the America conscience. I personally do not believe this. I think this kind of breaks down because this creates a weird damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. If the media does publish expose journalism then their creating catharsis that aids American human rights violations. If they don't report these things then citizens don't know there's anything to protest or attempt to change. Perhaps the OP is just generally fatalistic, I don't know.