Amid all the profound challenges and changes roiling the American news media today, newsrooms are debating whether traditional objectivity should still be the standard for news reporting. “Objectivity” is defined by most dictionaries as expressing or using facts without distortion by personal beliefs, bias, feelings or prejudice. . . .
But increasingly, reporters, editors and media critics argue that the concept of journalistic objectivity is a distortion of reality. They point out that the standard was dictated over decades by male editors in predominantly White newsrooms and reinforced their own view of the world. They believe that pursuing objectivity can lead to false balance or misleading “bothsidesism” in covering stories about race, the treatment of women, LGBTQ+ rights, income inequality, climate change and many other subjects. And, in today’s diversifying newsrooms, they feel it negates many of their own identities, life experiences and cultural contexts, keeping them from pursuing truth in their work.
Link: https://www.wsj.com/articles/notable-quotable-objectivity-media-reporters-edtiors-reality-newsroom-view-misleading-bias-journalism-11675285602?st=jzyevnelhe8qwko&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
restriction of neutrality and balance. They don't have to pretend they are on sideline reporting while they actually play on the field as #12 for one team against another team. That's fine. It is much easier for me to play game this way than their way of pretense of objectivity.
Journalism, like fiction, is an exploration of the writer's feelings.
I can promise you it is promoted by a very small minority of people in academia - and therefore a preposterously small percentage of Americans.
This is all just a phase, an intellectual fashion that won't be here too long. Whatever lasting impact it has will be rather minor - and probably for the good.
(no message)
I don't know, these concepts seem pretty intrenched.
Why isn't there more pushback? Tenured professors seem terrified to make any "mistakes".
I don't deal with those concepts, or anything close, so I generally don't have to worry about it.
Some dive right in. Most don't.
I predict that, in 10 years, the absurd excesses will have blown over - and we'll be left with more awareness of the perspectives of marginalized people, so it will have all been for the good.
We need a healthy conservative party to reign in the excesses - instead, now we have overreactions in the other direction.
The fringes will not overwhelm the silent majority in the long run. And that majority is tolerant of difference, in general, and rather intolerant of absurd excesses.
points the MSM feeds a person (those dumb enough to believe them anyway).
Not everyone's feelings matter, only the correct feelings matter. Incorrect feelings will be censored and suppressed.
God forbid people be exposed to ‘bothsideism’ and actually form their own opinions.
Not a cult, at all.
Indenpendent thinking triggers anxiety.