Reading the NY Times story on the "intimated" affair between John McCain and a lobbyist has proved to me that fact-based, investigative journalism is dead, if not mortally wounded and on life support. The article begins from the perspective of the candidate's campaign 8 years ago and brings up an innuendo from articles then that there was something improper about the relationship. It fails to report that the same news organizations later reported that nothing untoward was involved. The reporters use the innuendo, supported by iinsinuations that something was wrong simply because someone might think something is wrong.
When the Great Gray Lady publishes a significant story based on disproven theories, innuendo and anonymous sources you know something is definitely wrong. But it's with the Times, not the candidate. Even if it eventually turns out to be true, the times is supposed to operate by a higher standard.
We're all very much concerned with the lack of advertising support for the free press, but it's shoddy reporting like this that makes the public not so concerned.