Objectivity isn’t a magic wand - Columbia Journalism Review

I'm delighted that the Black Lives Movement has sparked increased attention to the issue of "objectivity" in the news media. I hope the discussion continues within the news media and journalism school as well as within the general public -- and leads to improved and revised attitudes toward so-called objectivity.

Still, for what it's worth, reconsidering the value and function of objectivity affects news coverage in all fields and issues. As a longtime news junkie and liberal/progressive political activist -- and as a former journalism student, newspaper journalist, journalism instructor and government public information officer -- I have thought that too many reporters (and their editors) have a simplistic attitude toward objectivity (as well as fairness and balance). I probably did too when I worked as a newspaper reporter.

It's resulted in a false equivalence when reporting "both sides" of a political, social, or economic issue. That false equivalence has translated in modern parlance to the idea of "You're entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts." And the result is that too often opinions are treated "objectivity" with inadequate attention by the news media to researching and reporting the facts of those opinions.

The unfortunate result is that "accuracy" -- another element of journalism that is as at least as essential as objectivity -- gets minimized, ignored or lost in trying to achieve objectivity. In fact (so to speak), facts are even denigrated these days. Think climate change deniers, Donald Trump, his definition of "fake news," and his use of "alternative facts."

So, GOOD! The news media, journalism teachers and we news consumers must seriously come to terms with what we want and expect in the objectivity and accuracy of news reporting.

Mathew Ingram writes in this Columbia Journalism Review article:

"One of the things that is being called into question is the concept of objectivity.

"Wesley Lowery, a reporter with 60 Minutes, put some of this into words with a recent essay in the New York Times entitled 'A Reckoning Over Objectivity, Led by Black Journalists.' Whatever the ideals behind objectivity might be, Lowery wrote, in practice it translates into an industry in which 'the mainstream has allowed what it considers objective truth to be decided almost exclusively by white reporters and their mostly white bosses.'

"And it’s important to note that this not only leaves Black journalists—and other journalists of color—on the outside looking in, but also makes for worse journalism, if by journalism we mean representing the truth about the world as accurately as possible.

"What qualifies as objective journalism, Lowery says, 'is constructed atop a pyramid of subjective decision-making: which stories to cover, how intensely to cover those stories, which sources to seek out and include, which pieces of information are highlighted and which are downplayed.'

"The piece sparked a conversation on Twitter, including a response from Tom Rosenstiel, a veteran journalist and executive director of the American Press Institute, and the co-author of a classic journalism textbook called The Elements of Journalism (a book that Lowery cites approvingly in his essay). In a multi-tweet thread, Rosenstiel tried to clarify what he said were some of the historic aspects of how objectivity became an industry standard principle.

"The practice began as a way of injecting more scientific rigor into the practice of journalism, he says, but instead it has turned into a devotion to false balance and other elements of what journalism professor Jay Rosen calls 'the view from nowhere.' ..."

Continued at the link.