But at the same time, I don’t quite get it. Concern for context in journalism has been around since before the Hutchins Commission, which in 1947 wrote: “The media should provide a truthful, comprehensive and intelligent account of the day’s events in a context which gives them meaning.”

So, what’s different today? The Web, obviously. It provides great opportunities for context and background.

But, then again, so do books, and they’re not new.

But, then then, the most oft-cited “explainer” I’m aware of is a radio program, This American Life’s “Giant Pool of Money” (which lived up to the hype).

I’m left with a couple of questions:

Does “context” mean something different now such that Web provides it better than “old” media could?

If explainers are so important to our understanding, why do we need newspapers? Even after we understand the context, what good is a daily report when a more infrequent summary could provide the same, while linking it to the context we’ve already absorbed or the context we don’t know yet? (As a commenter on PressThink notes, explainers are not simple.)

Has the meaning of “context” changed such that the time and effort normally considered required to understand an issue in context is no longer applies? If news organizations’ try to provide the news quickly and in easily-digestable forms, should we expect them to provide context?

Paul Steiger addresses the future of investigative reporting “in the Web era” in an essay on the Huffington Post.

Newspapers once provided the bulk of the nation’s investigative reporting into “[abuses] of power and failure to uphold the public interest.” Today, newspapers and the depth of their coverage, are thinning, dying, or already dead.

Who will pick up the slack?

Steiger wants to counter “the extreme Web advocates” who argue that individual bloggers or crowdsourcing a lá Wikipedia will “gradually get us to truth.” He argues that only organizations will be able to muster the technical, financial, and legal resources necessary for sustained investigations.

Steiger, who edits ProPublica, the non-profit reporting outfit, says his is one of many organizations in the developing news ecosystem that may be able to sustain the journalism that newspapers are leaving behind.

Read: Paul Steiger, “Investigative Reporting in the Web Era,” on The Huffington Post.

Dave’s food for thought

• Steiger never mentions money beyond that it’s necessary for investigative reporting. Where’s it gonna come from for him and the new kinds of organizations he mentions?

• Is there a point to attacking “the extreme” Web advocates? Who takes them seriously? Not to mention he attacks a straw man – no sources or links are cited to demonstrate who holds this “extreme” position.