Completely agree - but due to the pervasive pathologies of journalistic and political culture, when they do take a look in the mirror, they’re likely to tell themselves “You are doing a great job by not giving in to ‘partisanship,’ and by staying ‘neutral’ and above the fray!”
https://twitter.com/marceelias/status/1473868020124684289
…and considering the existing incentive structures in journalism and politics, they’re also likely looking at someone who - strictly in terms of advancing their own careers - is doing everything right. That needs to change.
The “neutrality” dogma demands this kind of coverage: As defined by too many journalists and political observers, it means keeping equidistance from #BothSides. But with the GOP rapidly radicalizing, the “neutral” position provides cover for extremism and leads to distortions.
“Nonpartisanship” and “neutrality” may sound like admirable values - in a vacuum. But the fundamental reality of American politics is that truth, democracy, and the rule of law have become partisan issues. Under these circumstances, “neutrality” often equals complicity.
It’s a major problem that much of political journalism is built around “nonpartisanship” as the highest value, incentivizing journalists to constantly signal “neutrality” unless they want to risk losing credibility and access. (There’s way too much of that in academia too…)
At the risk of sounding naive and unsophisticated: The job should be to cover and assess politics as objectively, accurately, and adequately as possible. Under current circumstances, that task is very much in conflict with established ideas of “neutrality” and “nonpartisanship.”
If your professional values keep you from grappling honestly with the fact that one party is broadly committed to the idea of multiracial, pluralistic democracy and the other is determined to prevent America from ever becoming such a democracy, it’s time to ditch those values.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
