Has anyone noticed that few American interviewers really challenge their interviewees? There seems to be a trend away from in-depth research that could facilitate probing and leading questions. Several factors seem to be influencing this trend:

1. The shift towards sensationalism and entertainment in media. In the race for ratings and clicks, in-depth investigative reporting often takes a backseat to more sensational, attention-grabbing content.
2. The consolidation of media ownership can lead to fewer resources being allocated to investigative journalism, as profit margins become a higher priority.
3. The consolidation has also seen a reduction in the editorial independence of media companies, aligning content more closely to the views of their owners.

Let’s take a recent claim made by RFK Jr. This week, Kennedy, US President Donald Trump’s pick to be health secretary, was questioned in Senate hearings over his time in Samoa during the measles outbreak, which killed 83 people. He claimed, “Eighty-three people died. When tissue samples were sent to New Zealand, most of those people did not have measles, we do not know what was killing them.” Yes, it’s true no measles was found. Not one. But, and this is where truth becomes a lie, no tissue samples were sent to New Zealand. Following his logic on measles in Samoa, perhaps he’ll next declare that because he didn’t receive any mail today, the postal service must be a myth. It’s fascinating how RFK Jr. dismisses vaccines, much like denying the role of seatbelts in car safety because he once took a short trip without wearing one and “turned out just fine.”

When lies are not challenged, but simply reported, the lies develop a life of their own, growing and melding with other lies and half-truths to become alternative “truths” while the real truth becomes “fake news.” The role of the Fourth Estate is to challenge claims made by those with influence by digging deeply into the claims made by politicians, business leaders—in fact, everyone who exerts some form of power, decision-making, or influence.

I do not know the process involved with Senate hearings for executive appointments, so I do not know what opportunity Democrats might have to follow up on RFK Jr.’s claims, but the role of journalists is precisely this. Will any journalist ask, “So, Mr. Kennedy, how did you manage to find evidence in samples that were never sent?” or “Can you share your secret method for detecting diseases in non-existent samples?”

And while they have him cornered, I can think of some more questions he needs to be asked:

• “Mr. Kennedy, can you explain how vaccines, which have eradicated diseases like smallpox, are actually a global conspiracy?”
• “Given your expertise, how do you suggest we protect ourselves from diseases without vaccines? Perhaps a daily dose of wishful thinking?”
• “Can you share your thoughts on how the medical community has managed to keep this ‘vaccine hoax’ going for over a century?”
• “What are your views on the scientific method? Is it just another tool of the ‘big pharma’ agenda?”
• “How do you respond to the overwhelming evidence and studies that support the efficacy of vaccines? Are they all part of the grand illusion?”

In the absence of investigative reporting, perhaps we’ll soon see news items like these:

• “In a groundbreaking revelation, RFK Jr. asserts that the absence of reported UFO landings on his front lawn is definitive proof that extraterrestrials don’t exist anywhere in the universe.”
• “When asked how to combat infectious diseases without vaccines, RFK Jr. suggested we all hold our breath indefinitely to avoid inhaling any germs.”
• “He recommends a daily regimen of positive thinking and crystal healing, claiming it’s just as effective as any scientifically developed vaccine.”

And JFK Jr is just one of how many political appointments?