No one ever had an "exclusive" with Napoleon; the very concept of the interview had to be invented first. Read about its surprisingly short history—the idea of reporters asking people a series of probing questions only became common in the late 1800s—then discuss with your team: would news coverage be better without them? Press conferences, too, are a recent development—research where and how they started, and how they have changed over time.

• Journalism historians have tried to date the first newspaper interview—some credit James Gordon Bennett in 1836, others Horace Greeley in 1859—but it is less important to identify an individual inventor than to recognize that a practice largely unknown as late as 1860 was familiar, and controversial, a decade later.
• Exclusives are always interesting and provide a lot of information about important figures, especially in politics.
• From the beginning this new journalistic form, in which a reporter questioned and then quoted by name a public figure, came in for heavy criticism. E. L. Godkin, editor of The Nation , attacked it as “the joint production of some humbug of a hack politician and another humbug of a newspaper reporter.” Nonetheless, President Andrew Johnson himself submitted to the new practice in 1868, and “the idea took like wild-fire,” as the Atlanta journalist Henry Grady wrote in 1879.
• I literally cannot find any credible sources for how exclusives have changed over time, but it is noticeable that compared to the past, exclusives have been way more common and popular that there are exclusives for almost every type of person; whether they are a celebrity, political figure, athlete, criminal, or a random person.

Records suggest that India's first newspaper was Hicky's Bengal Gazette, published in the 1780s—but that was, at best, the first in the English mold. Bylines were a byproduct of colonialism; indeed, one of South Africa's earliest newspapers was unironically called The Colonist. But global cultures and civilizations have long found other ways to inform the public of important developments, from the bulletin board to the town crier. Research other ways that news spread in different areas of the world before the arrival of Western-style journalism, then discuss with your team: what can we learn from these methods, and are some of them alive and well today on the Internet?

• Hicky’s Bengal Gazette: basically India’s first newspaper that was published by a white man.
• The Colonist: The publication of newspaper was restricted by the government policies and lack of sufficient technology for frequent and bulk production. However, in countries such as South Africa, the publication of newspapers came as a relief to many who could now access government information and services. The government used newspapers for most of its advertisements announcements reaching a larger audience. The critics of the government and colonies also used newspapers to air their grievances and opinion. However, the government had to censor some of the newspapers like South African Commercial Advertiser to redeem its image.
• Chinese language periodicals goes back to the Spring and Autumn Annals, and traces through more than a thousand years of tipao, including Kaiyuan Za Bao and the Peking Gazette. The Peking Gazette was published daily until 1912. As this publication was intended for government officials only, it is not considered a true newspaper. However, it was widely read by others. The proper newspaper was introduced relatively late in the Far East, as a result of Western influence and the adoption of the printing press (from Wikipedia, it’s so hard to find info for this omfg -rana).
• Will be saying this generally because I’ve tried using my college’s online database and I still can’t find anything (so please take this with a grain of salt) but it can be said that pre-western expansion, countries had their own form of spreading news like through word of mouth, some kind of paper which contained information, or general announcements that were announced in town centers.
• What we can learn from these methods is that even if modern technology is taken away from humans, we will continue to find methods in informing and educating the public and each other of current news and events. These practices are definitely still alive and well in every community globally.

Historians draw on newspaper and other records of this kind to construct their story of the past. But the nature of journalism—what is being communicated, to whom, and in what formats—has changed over the years. Discuss with your team: will today's approaches to journalism make it easier for people in the future to understand who we were and why we made the choices we did?

• The approached to contemporary journalism is pretty much biased. In America, for example, the news and kind of journalism a person reads wholly depend on their political stance (i.e. Republicans watch Fox News and Democrats watch CNN). As a self-proclaimed leftist who has shit to say about both parties and immigrated to the US for school, the aforementioned news sources are equally biased and will undoubtedly make people in the future even more confused and possibly even divide people on what happened “in the past.” On the other hand, issues surrounding racial injustices and LGBTQ+ injustices would be better understood in the future as POC and queer journalists are more present than ever and have their own voices (in comparison to queer and POC stories and issues which have been disregarded throughout history because of discrimination).

Some journalists are themselves in the business of reconstructing the past—often the recent past, at their own peril, even as others are doing their best to hide it. Work with your team to investigate the origins of investigative reporting and some of its most famous success stories, from Watergate to Weinstein, then discuss with your team: what would you set out to investigate in this way if you could? Are there times when investigate reporting might be too risky—or harmful to the public interest?

• Investigative reporting has been very risky to the journalists life and would harm the victim, like in Scream (1996) where Gale Weathers goes over boundaries and encounters Ghost Face. (or omg like the one in vox or was it vice where they went to china -ten)
• DEFINITION: Investigative journalism involves exposing to the public matters that are concealed–either deliberately by someone in a position of power, or accidentally, behind a chaotic mass of facts and circumstances that obscure understanding. It requires using both secret and open sources and documents.
• It is definitely way better to watch videos about the Watergate scandal and the Weinstein case. But for some very basic context: Watergate involves past US president Richard Nixon and his impeachment; while the Weinstein case involves an acclaimed Hollywood producer named Harvey Weinstein (he produced the Scream franchise, Spy Kids, films that were directed by Quentin Tarantino like Kill Bill, and so many more films like it’s insane) and the many sexual assault and rape allegations made against him.

I’m horrified to say or type out any of what I’m thinking of, and frankly, have been thinking off ever since I’ve learned what investigative journalism is, but just know that it involves “certain countries in Asia” that are deeply involved in the oil industry and thus have singlehandedly affected climate change (I will not say any country names pls don’t blacklist me). There have been countless of times where investigative reporting went too far to the point where journalists ended up disappearing or, worse, dead (i.e. Filipino journalists who have decided to investigate corrupt politicians ‘mysteriously’ going missing or getting shot by a ‘random’ passerby). A specific example I can think of at the top of my head was the assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018 in Turkey.