• Fellowships
  • Reports
  • Lab
  • Storyboard
    • Nieman Foundation at Harvard
    HOME
    About
    Subscribe
    Archives
              
    Foundation
    Reports
    Storyboard
    LATEST STORY
    Why “Sorry, I don’t know” is sometimes the best answer: The Washington Post’s technology chief on its first AI chatbot
    Business Models Mobile & Apps Audience & Social Aggregation & Discovery Reporting & Production
    ABOUT                    SUBSCRIBE
    April 18, 2019, 11:21 a.m.
    Aggregation & Discovery
    Ready to read the report?!? Despite decades of digital decay, The Washington Post’s 1998 copy of the Starr Report is still alive
    LINK: www.washingtonpost.com  ➚   |   Posted by: Christine Schmidt   |   April 18, 2019

    Want to read the big report?

    No, not the Mueller Report, the document many have thirsted after for months as the special counsel investigated Russia’s influence on the 2016 elections. (You can find that one here, FYI.) I’m talking about the Starr Report — the Referral From Independent Counsel Kenneth W. Starr in Conformity with the Requirement of Title 28, United States Code, Section 595(c), to be precise — the conclusion of that other investigation, more than 20 years ago, into President Bill Clinton. And thanks to The Washington Post, a digital copy of it from back then is still alive and accessible, despite so many other links from that era having gone 404 in years since.

    As Attorney General William Barr fielded reporters at a presser (hours before releasing the actual report), the same ole Post link from 1998 made the rounds on Twitter. The only other complete file of it I could find was from the Government Publishing Office, available in plain text and PDF. (If you don’t want to read it, you might instead just listen to Slow Burn and then watch Monica Lewinsky’s TED talk.)

    The news about Starr’s investigation into Clinton’s scandal broke just days after Mark Stencel, then the politics editor of the Post’s website, had launched the politics section online. The Starr Report then came out about eight months later. “It was like a news artifact that was made for the internet,” he said. “It was this gargantuan document that didn’t make sense to sit there and read on TV. It would take time to format to put it into print in full. This was something we could do almost instantly with the internet.”

    RELATED ARTICLE
    “Of the 21 news organizations in our study, 19 were not taking any protective steps at all to archive their web output”
    March 28, 2019
    But it’s kind of remarkable that this artifact has survived this long, unlike most of the early web. Very few news organizations are actually archiving their work in its full form; a report from Columbia researchers recently found 19 of 21 news organizations surveyed were not taking any protective steps to archive their online journalism. Newsroom interviewees told them things like “It’s been preserved on the website/CMS” and “If it’s in a Google Doc, it’s sort of there forever. Right?” (Wrong!!!)

    “Some functions don’t work — old RealPlayer video clips or some search functions, like the one we did for the Starr report. I live in fear that someone will casually delete all that early digital history, when we were just figuring out how to cover and present the news online,” Stencel said.

    At least the Mueller Report is on DocumentCloud?

    Show tags
     
    What’s the best way to follow how the news is changing?
    Our daily email, with all the freshest future-of-journalism news.
    Prefer a once-a-week email? »
    The latest from Nieman Lab
    Why “Sorry, I don’t know” is sometimes the best answer: The Washington Post’s technology chief on its first AI chatbot
    Andrew Deck
    Browser cookies, as unkillable as cockroaches, won’t be leaving Google Chrome after all
    Joshua Benton
    Would you pay to be able to quit TikTok and Instagram? You’d be surprised how many would
    Peter Martin
    BREAKING: The ways people hear about big news these days; “into a million pieces,” says source
    Joshua Benton
    In 1924, a magazine ran a contest: “Who is to pay for broadcasting and how?” A century later, we’re still asking the same question
    Julia Barton
    Join the 60,000 who get the freshest future-of-journalism news in our daily email.
    Why “Sorry, I don’t know” is sometimes the best answer: The Washington Post’s technology chief on its first AI chatbot
    “For Google, that might be failure mode…but for us, that is success,” says the Post’s Vineet Khosla
    Browser cookies, as unkillable as cockroaches, won’t be leaving Google Chrome after all
    Google — which planned to block third-party cookies in 2022, then 2023, then 2024, then 2025 — now says it won’t block them after all. A big win for adtech, but what about publishers?
    Would you pay to be able to quit TikTok and Instagram? You’d be surprised how many would
    “The relationship he has uncovered is more like the co-dependence seen in a destructive relationship, or the way we relate to addictive products such as tobacco that we know are doing us harm.”
    Help advance the Nieman Foundation’s mission “to promote and elevate the standards of journalism” by making a donation.

    To promote and elevate the standards of journalism

    Covering thought leadership in journalism

    Pushing to the future of journalism

    Exploring the art and craft of story
    © 2024 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College  /  Some rights reserved
    Harvard Trademark Privacy Digital Accessibility
    Walter Lippmann House    One Francis Ave.    Cambridge, MA 02138    617 495 2237