You're a journalist. You're working on a big story about a Big Story, a feature piece that you have lots of time - weeks, months - to source and research.
You approach it from a certain perspective, with premises to prove, theories to support, ideas to direct and notions to develop.
Or perhaps disprove, and unsupport, and re-direct, and re-develop. The story - and your path to a finished, cohesive product - doesn't always take you where you expect to go.
In fact it commonly leads in some unexpected directions, because of unexpected information.
In fact it commonly leads in some unexpected directions, because of unexpected information.
So while you start from somewhere with a "story idea" - newspaper and magazine writers/editors brainstorm story ideas all the time - your only real direction is toward the truth and the actual story: where the information leads, where the facts take you.
Unless of course you are Philadelphia Magazine and writer Robert Huber, and you're writing a feature about Joe Paterno and the Sandusky scandal.