Name: Objectivity isn’t a magic wand
Brand: cjr.org
SKU: cjr-org-43
Availability: OnlineOnly
Rating: 73 (1 reviews)

critic

Objectivity isn’t a magic wand

preview

The voice of journalismJune 25, 2020The protests over the death of George Floyd (or not covered) by newsrooms around the country has widened existing stress fractures in journalism. 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 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—, 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,, “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, 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 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 RosenRosenstiel is quite right that objectivity started as an attempt to make journalism more rigorous, a structure and process designed to arrive at an objective truth. But the industry probably shouldn’t congratulate itself too much on the purity of the intentions behind this change: it wasn’t just that journalists or publishers suddenly decided that objectivity would be a good thing. It was also seen as a way, as the consumer-focused ad industry was becoming more national in scope. Over the next 50 years or so, objectivity came to be seen as a bedrock principle of journalism, to the point where some newspaper journalists— and journalism teachers—. But as Lowery points out, what qualifies as objectivity is in the eye of the beholder, and that eye is still predominantly male and white.ICYMI:While the scientific method may be designed to be impartial, as Rosenstiel suggests, it some of the most horrific injustices. Scientific studies from prestigious researchers and influential institutions have been used to “prove” that women are inferior to men, or that Blacks and other people of color, or that the mentally handicapped should be euthanized. It’s not as though the scientific method is a magic wand that bestows omniscience. More recently, algorithms have been pitched as the solution to a number of social problems, including crime and online abuse—and yet, algorithms, which isn’t surprising, since they are designed by human beings. Even conscientious programmers often wind up and prejudices into the software they write.Rosenstiel also took issue with the suggestion that objectivity could or should be replaced by a sense of what Lowery called “moral clarity.” If journalists take refuge in subjectivity, Rosenstiel said, “their opinions have more moral integrity than genuine inquiry [and] journalism will be lost.” But Lowery argues that getting rid of the concept of objectivity doesn’t mean a return to the partisan press that preceded it, or a descent into a swamp of subjectivity and opinion. Instead, he suggests that a better approach that we will “devote ourselves to accuracy, that we will diligently seek out the perspectives of those with whom we personally may be inclined to disagree, and that we will be just as sure to ask hard questions of those with whom we’re inclined to agree.”Note: We will be discussing this topic next week in a series of interviews on. If you can think of anyone who should be part of this discussion—especially journalists, academics or researchers of color, or those from outside the traditional media industry—please let us know.Here’s more on objectivity and journalism:&nbsp;Other notable stories:ICYMI:Has America ever needed a media watchdog more than now? Help us by .Mathew Ingram is CJR’s chief digital writer. Previously, he was a senior writer with Fortune magazine. He has written about the intersection between media and technology since the earliest days of the commercial internet. His writing has been published in the Washington Post and the Financial Times as well as by Reuters and Bloomberg.On Saturday, September 3, the body of Jeff German, an investigative reporter at the Las Vegas Review-Journal, was found outside his home. He had been stabbed to death in an altercation nearly twenty-four hours earlier, police said. His colleagues’ first...

The voice of journalismJune 25, 2020The protests over the death of George Floyd (or not covered) by newsrooms around the country has widened existing stress fractures in journalism. 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 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...

public

Mathew Ingram is CJR’s chief digital writer. Previously, he was a senior writer with Fortune magazine. He has written about the intersection between media and technology since the earliest days of the commercial internet. His writing has been published in the Washington Post and the Financial Times as well as by Reuters and Bloomberg.

https://twitter.com/intent/user?screen_name=mathewi

Mathew Ingram

Monitoring the press, tracking the evolving media business & encouraging excellence in journalism since 1961.

Objectivity isn’t a magic wand

No article scores yet.

CRITIC REVIEWS

PUBLIC REVIEWS