Radiophage

Because journalists should serve as a check on the ambitions of power.

This is not to say they should oppose everything people in power do -- it's possible to pass checks just as easily as to fail them. But the task of a journalist, ideally, is one of scrutiny, not promotion.

If there were not so many examples of journalism used for other ends, this would be clearer.

EDIT> for clarity; I missed a point where I should have revised that I was talking about power, not necessarily gov't

Commissioner Cohon, there must be some aspects of the job that are fun, but don't always get the most publicity compared to your more public announcements and interactions with fans.

What's a part of your job that you really, really love, but the media or fans wouldn't know about?

Yes, tell us!

I see you caught me before my ninja edit! Apologies. I intended to to make my point about people in power, not necessarily government.

Whether it's legislative power or sporting power, though, I still stand by my point, and costs are precisely what is at issue. Hosting huge events like the World Cup is not always a net benefit to a country, and journalists should be asking hard questions about whether paying the costs involved are worth it.

Again, asking questions and investigating leads does not necessarily equate to opposition. Often -- particularly with the World Cup, as opposed to the Olympics -- there is a net benefit to the host country, and questions about the costs end up in a fun "Did You Know?" piece rather than a hard-hitting investigative report.

But the questions should still be asked, by journalists, and answered, by those in power. Otherwise, we are handing control of public information to marketing reps and PR firms, which is only a net benefit to them and their clients.

Guilty. ;) If there was ever an AMA to ask it in, though...