Objectivity in Newspaper Reporting
Can Biases Be Avoided in News Writing? Is Personal Viewpoint Good?
Newspapers have traditionally been expected to maintain fair and impartial methods of storytelling. But that concept is possibly more theory than absolute practice, especially in contemporary society.
Readers' interests have changed, as have the variety of media platforms, most notably the inclusion of the Internet with its near-instantaneous-snippets of information from all around the globe.
Fair and balanced storytelling is still the goal of most newspaper journalists. Their traditional purpose is to attempt to provide readers with facts with which the public can form opinions and make decisions regarding political elections, civic matters and, in general, the truth of who did what, when, where, how and why.
But some journalists are calling into question the necessity to maintain such a rigid guideline that may not be possible, may not be so truthful at all, and may be no longer as relevant in an age when information is so readily available around the clock.
Limitations of Objectivity in News Reporting
By the very nature of what often motivates a person to become a reporter s/he is a compassionate sort of person.
They do the leg work because they care to keep the public in the know about society's happenings. They care to play a role in a community that can, ultimately, effect positive changes by making readers aware that, say, a politician is corrupt or a school teacher is abusive or that a homeless shelter is particularly fantastic at aiding those in need.
That such a caring person maintains any notable degree of objectivity as a newspaper reporter attests to that individual's professionalism, and ability to maintain honest credibility as a messenger in the community.
So, whether or not a news story, or its author, is fully objective is often not about poor intentions by an individual or an editorial staff. A lack of objectivity is often a consequence of any number of circumstances.
Chuck Klosterman, a journalist (Esquire, GQ, the Washington Post) and book author (Fargo Rock City, Killing Yourself to Live) revealed the reality of so-called journalistic objectivity in his book Sex, Drugs and Cocoa Puffs:
"Everybody seems to be concerned that journalists are constantly trying to slip their own political and philosophical beliefs into what they cover. This virtually never happens. And I am not being naive when I say this; it really doesn't happen. There are thousands of things that affect the accuracy of news stories, but the feelings of the actual reporter is almost never one of them. The single most important impact of any story is far less sinister: Mostly it all comes down to (a) who the journalist has called, and (b) which of those people happens to call back first."
Personal Viewpoint in the Media
The New York Times reported on Arianna Huffington, founder of The Huffington Post, when she addressed what she calls the false neutrality in the media. Katharine Q. Seelye of The Times wrote:
"One of the worst things the old media do, the author, liberal pundit and founder of HuffingtonPost.com said, is present two sides of a story as if the two sides had equal value, creating a false neutrality that often does not exist. They fall back, she said, on 'the illusion of neutrality instead of ferreting out the truth.'"
The bottom line is reporters are human beings, not machines; and even when two sides of an argument are included in a story, the degree to which that creates equality is subjective.
The subjects of news stories are also humans, acting in human ways that often include colors of right and wrong. All the more difficult it can become to maintain true objectivity in newspaper reporting.
