======================================================================
= Journalistic objectivity =
======================================================================
Introduction
======================================================================
Journalistic objectivity is a considerable notion within the
discussion of journalistic professionalism. Journalistic objectivity
may refer to fairness, disinterestedness, factuality, and
nonpartisanship, but most often encompasses all of these qualities.
First evolving as a practice in the 18th century, a number of
critiques and alternatives to the notion have emerged since, fuelling
ongoing and dynamic discourse surrounding the ideal of objectivity in
journalism.
Most newspapers and TV stations depend upon news agencies for their
material, and each of the four major global agencies (Agence
France-Presse (formerly the Havas agency), Associated Press, Reuters
and Agencia EFE) began with and continue to operate on a basic
philosophy of providing a single objective news feed to all
subscribers. That is, they do not provide separate feeds for
conservative or liberal newspapers. Journalist Jonathan Fenby has
explained the notion:
To achieve such wide acceptability, the agencies avoid overt
partiality. Demonstrably correct information is their stock in trade.
Traditionally, they report at a reduced level of responsibility,
attributing their information to a spokesman, the press, or other
sources. They avoid making judgments and steer clear of doubt and
ambiguity. Though their founders did not use the word, objectivity is
the philosophical basis for their enterprises - or failing that,
widely acceptable neutrality.
Objectivity in journalism aims to help the audience make up their own
mind about a story, providing the facts alone and then letting
audiences interpret those on their own. To maintain objectivity in
journalism, journalists should present the facts whether or not they
like or agree with those facts. Objective reporting is meant to
portray issues and events in a neutral and unbiased manner, regardless
of the writers opinion or personal beliefs.
Definitions
======================================================================
Sociologist Michael Schudson suggests that "the belief in objectivity
is a faith in 'facts,' a distrust in 'values,' and a commitment to
their segregation". Objectivity also outlines an institutional role
for journalists as a fourth estate, a body that exists apart from
government and large interest groups.
Journalistic objectivity requires that a journalist not be on either
side of an argument. The journalist must report only the facts and not
a personal attitude toward the facts. While objectivity is a complex
and dynamic notion that may refer to a multitude of techniques and
practices, it generally refers to the idea of "three distinct, yet
interrelated, concepts": truthfulness, neutrality, and detachment.
Truthfulness is a commitment to reporting only accurate and truthful
information, without skewing any facts or details to improve the story
or better align an issue with any certain agenda. Neutrality suggests
that stories be reported in an unbiased, even-handed, and impartial
manner. Under this notion, journalists are to side with none of the
parties involved, and simply provide the relevant facts and
information of all. The third idea, detachment, refers to the
emotional approach of the journalist. Essentially, reporters should
not only approach issues in an unbiased manner, but also with a
dispassionate and emotionless attitude. Through this strategy, stories
can be presented in a rational and calm manner, letting the audience
make up their minds without any influences from the media.
History
======================================================================
The modern notion of objectivity in journalism is largely due to the
work of Walter Lippmann. Lippmann was the first to widely call for
journalists to use the scientific method for gathering information.
Lippmann called for journalistic objectivity after the excesses of
yellow journalism. He noted that the yellows at the time had served
their purpose, but that the people needed to receive the actual news,
and not a "romanticized version of it".
The term 'objectivity' was not applied to journalistic work until the
20th century, but it had fully emerged as a guiding principle by the
1890s. Michael Schudson, among a number of other communication
scholars and historians, agree that the idea of objectivity has
prevailed in dominant discourse among journalists in the United States
since the appearance of modern newspapers in the Jacksonian Era of the
1830s. These papers transformed the press amidst the democratization
of politics, the expansion of a market economy, and the growing
authority of an entrepreneurial, urban middle class. Before then,
American newspapers were expected to present a partisan viewpoint, not
a neutral one.
The need for objectivity first occurred to Associated Press editors
who realize that partisanship would narrow their potential market.
Their goal was to reach all newspapers, and leave it to the individual
papers to decide on what slanting and commentary was needed. Lawrence
Gobright, the AP chief in Washington, explained the philosophy of
objectivity to Congress in 1856:
My business is to communicate facts. My instructions do not allow me
to make any comments upon the facts which I communicate. My
dispatches are sent to papers of all manner of politics, and the
editors say they are able to make their own comments upon the facts
which are sent to them. I therefore confine myself to what I consider
legitimate news. I do not act as a politician belonging to any
school, but try to be truthful and impartial. My dispatches are
merely dry matter of fact and detail.
But into the first decade of the twentieth century, it was uncommon
for to see a sharp divide between facts and values. However, during
World War I, scholar Stuart Allan (1997) suggests that propaganda
campaigns, as well the rise of "press agents and publicity experts",
fostered the growing cynicism among public towards state institutions
and "official channels of information". The elevation of objectivity
thus constituted as an effort to re-legitimatize the news press, as
well as the state in general.
Some historians, like Gerald Baldasty, have observed that objectivity
went hand in hand with the need to make profits in the newspaper
business by attracting advertisers. In this economic analysis,
publishers did not want to offend any potential advertising clients,
and therefore encouraged news editors and reporters to strive to
present all sides of an issue. Advertisers would remind the press that
partisanship hurts circulation, and, consequently, advertising
revenues - thus, objectivity was sought.
Others have proposed a political explanation for the rise of
objectivity; scholars like Richard Kaplan have argued that political
parties needed to lose their hold over the loyalties of voters and the
institutions of government before the press could feel free to offer a
nonpartisan, "impartial" account of news events. This change occurred
following the critical 1896 election and the subsequent reform of the
Progressive Era.
Later, during the period following World War II, the newly formalized
rules and practices of objectivity led to a brief national consensus
and temporary suspension of negative public opinion; however, doubts
and uncertainties in "the institutions of democracy and capitalism"
resurfaced in the period of civil unrest during the 1960s and 1970s,
ultimately leading to the emergence of the 'critique' of objectivity.
Criticisms
======================================================================
Some scholars and journalists criticize the understanding of
objectivity as neutrality or nonpartisanship, arguing that it does a
disservice to the public because it fails to attempt to find truth.
They also argue that such objectivity is nearly impossible to apply in