Too many people show a stunning lack of objectivity about objectivity, its meaning and historical origins with respect to news reporting.
The classic book “The Elements of Journalism” devoted a subchapter to its “Lost Meaning.”
A quick thread.
The classic book “The Elements of Journalism” devoted a subchapter to its “Lost Meaning.”
A quick thread.
The book’s authors trace the concept to circa 1919 and later, as reporters like Walter Lippmann and others sought to professionalize journalism by formulating a set of standards.
So, first thing to note is, journalistic objectivity is a style with a historical context.
So, first thing to note is, journalistic objectivity is a style with a historical context.
As formulated by those who conceptualized it, it was a discipline of verification.
From the book:
“In this original understanding of objectivity, neutrality is not a fundamental principle of journalism.”
From the book:
“In this original understanding of objectivity, neutrality is not a fundamental principle of journalism.”
This is a quote from what is essentially a bible of the objective style in journalism.
The second half of that quote is important: Neutrality is a voice to gain readers’ trust that you have heard and considered all sides.
Ultimately, the responsibility is verification.
The second half of that quote is important: Neutrality is a voice to gain readers’ trust that you have heard and considered all sides.
Ultimately, the responsibility is verification.
Moreover, that voice - while useful in persuading readers - can be deceptive.
“The neutral voice, without the discipline of verification, is veneer atop something hollow.“
“The neutral voice, without the discipline of verification, is veneer atop something hollow.“
Then, there are the economic realities of the style requiring standardization, such as newswires selling the same articles to various outlets across the political spectrum.
The upshot is: Objectivity is less a quality than a discipline and style with a history and context.
The upshot is: Objectivity is less a quality than a discipline and style with a history and context.
To antagonists of the press, objectivity can be a synonym for: shut up, a way to silence facts that one side finds politically inconvenient.
False equivalence is a way to inoculate against this criticism, but it's a betrayal of the objective style. The job is verification, not misleading readers in order to appear neutral, e.g., by treating calls for civil disobedience as equivalent to attacks on private businesses.
Objectivity has gotten a bad rap, often because it's poorly understood. It's not the only style, and it's of a historical moment in journalism. But properly understood, it's a lot less meek and stodgy than its self-appoint guardians make it out to be.
"There can be no liberty for a community which lacks the information by which to detect lies," Walter Lippman, one of the originators of journalistic objectivity as a concept.
Notice he didn't say provable falsehoods.
<End thread>
Notice he didn't say provable falsehoods.
<End thread>
