Much more bang for the buck:
Buy the rights to her most cherished country love song so Lil Nas X can remake it for a modern audience
Weak sauce. A lot of claims, not a lot backing it up. Loose connections. Photos of people with people.
Project Pegasus
Pandora Papers
Five Eyes
Mercury Lobbying
Are worth digging, yes. There could be more than meets the eye on any of them. Ops and reverse ops.
Most likely people are not 100% good or 100% bad. Most likely some of those who play a role will not have an untarnished legacy. Most likely there are some we trust who shouldn't be. But bold claims require extensive sourcing.
One way to distinguish:
A careful researcher with good intentions will carefully document and avoid appeals to emotion, respecting the reader well enough, and trusting the data well enough, to allow conclusions to be drawn. Rather than phony persuasion.
False narrative
No journalism ever did anything but expose problems. That's what it's designed to do. People through representative government then bring accountability for those problems.
The measure of US is how much change has been brought. The measure of O'keefe is what he has exposed and brought source for. And being an outlet with reach for the whistleblower.
That's not what you said at all. You said that you cannot keep yourself from feeling defeated. Which is a (you) problem.
On the off chance you came here to tell us how defeated we should be, and how dismissive we should be of the corruption that others are exposing and providing awareness platform for, for reasons other than being an intentional disruptor,
What are you doing that works better than James O'Keefe?
Perhaps I should pivot myself.
Maybe you are changing the world and people are wasting their time on him when they should be supporting you?
Here's your chance
You call me illiterate, your sentences are incomplete.
You project defeatism on others and do not see a problem within yourself, exhibited by your posting.
You say he offers no solutions, you offer no solutions when asked for another way.
You are here telling people how fucked up everything is, but without a resolution - so it's just noise.
I understand you feel under a constant barrage of bullshit and see yourself among few who have resisted learned helplessness. You're in the right place, we're not bullshit here, except where hilarious or shilly, and we're doing what we can in our own ways here.
Historically, journalism is one peaceful way to affect change. Public civics, attending functions, networking, running for office, voting, activism, demonstrations, protests, shitposting, memewars, you do you.
Limited view based on cynicism.
1) Corruption goes deep
2) O'Keefe exposes corruption, has a function to inform
3) Even so, little can be done
4) O'keefe does not provide a 'resolution of information'
5) O'keefe work becomes 'just noise' gets 'drowned out in the never ending bullshit news cycles'
6) Government must be disbanded or changed
1) agreed
2) and he fulfills his function
3) we disagree
4) not the typical job of a journalist - perhaps you can provide this resolution, or describe how that would be possible for a journalist, or for us
5) to the extent this is true, it's true for all journalism - are you arguing journalism is a waste?
6) agreed
Point well taken:
We are not effective at converting understanding to action or providing a roadmap for local action.