> many journalists have come around to the idea that while they are there to interpret the facts, being able to link and display the source materials is a servi

> many journalists have come around to the idea that while they are there to interpret the facts, being able to link and display the source materials is a service to their readers Very odd that in the midst of the last decade+ of loudly lamenting the death of journalism, nobody realized this sooner--that what people just might be willing to sustain financially is not only the synthesis of someone who has researched the problem and then publishes that synthesis, but someone who also gives the reader something: the paper trail that all that research produced (or the trailhead, at least). Too much of what passes for journalism (especially local news) is indistinguishable, if not in tone then at least in substantiation and credibility, from the rigorless, non-expert opinion of any arbitrary person on the Internet.