Very good thread on credibility in journalism--and let me add, it suggests why the push to get journalists to "call balls and strikes" is so profoundly misguided.
Basically, it would accelerate the spend-down of reputational capital that reporters acquired by not calling winners and losers in contentious disputes. Your side of those disputes gains an evanescent advantage followed by a permanent disadvantage.
Now, of course, I am an opinion journalist! I do call balls and strikes ...
But readers who don't agree with my opinions come to any facts I lay out, no matter how neutral and unobjectionable, with a jaundiced eye. That's the price.
But readers who don't agree with my opinions come to any facts I lay out, no matter how neutral and unobjectionable, with a jaundiced eye. That's the price.
And that's not a price that team "False balance" actually wants to pay. They seem to imagine that they can simultaneously shout "Liar! Liar! Pants on Fire!" at Trump while getting treated as if they're reporting "Just the facts, Ma'am".
One or the other, not both.
In my opinion, we need both.
In my opinion, we need both.
