Objectivity

Came across an article on Slate yesterday that attacks the notion of objectivity. It's entitled The Twilight of Objectivity and brings more of an economic dimension to the debate of what can easily be considered one of the most distinct of journalistic values. I had seen most of the arguments before, but this was the first time I came across them in a while. Thus, I got to thinking that led to this.

Well, I don't particularly care about the economics or practicality of being impartial and fair, but I do care about doing what is right. And I think that pursuing objectivity, as impossible as it may be, remains the right thing to do and a worthy goal. There are valid arenas in which one may present their opinion. Editorial pages. A personal blog or podcast. News articles and broadcasts are not amongst them. These are the places in which the public should be able to go to find the raw material and facts with which to form their opinions. I suppose one could make the argument that one is morally obligated to fight for their opinions, if they believe them to be right and proper, and try to spread them as much as possible. However, it is my belief that this philosophy belies an unbearable amount of arrogance when one applies it to the reporting of news rather than in a more appropriate venue. When one relates an event and tells others how to interpret it, they are placing themselves in a superior position, assuming that should their audience be given the facts straight-up they themselves could not come to a conclusion. Beyond this, what if you're wrong? Your belief is simply wrong. To take an example from the past, you thought that Woodrow Wilson would keep us out of the war and should be elected because of it and your reporting reflected this. Then he gets elected and drags the United States into the first World War. Way to screw up.

On the practical considerations, I believe reporting which seeks to eliminate all bias from its news reporting is integral to a stable society. If the whole notion of objectivity is to be chucked, I would not be surprised if people began to grow more distant and sheltered as they secured themselves by reading only the works of those who agree with them. There would be no common touchstones among people of differing political persuasions. Unbiased reporting provides this. When people use the same sources, they can understand one another a little better and improve their communication.