Tuesday, July 27, 2010

Dear journos: You are always editorializing.

Seriously.  We choose a subject among many possibilities.  We choose to frame the subject (event, issue, character) in a particular way. Or we let someone else (a source, an editor) make the choices. But even then, we should prepare to defend our choices, amend them or abandon them if they prove unsupportable under the weight of examination.

The "objectivity" journalists/philosophers tried to limit the damage of these fundamental choices by focusing their attention on the important attributes of good reporting, such as accuracy and taking multiple points of view into account.  But even when we enter a reporting theater with a completely open mind (assuming we could), we always have to make choices, usually among many that make just as much sense and tell just as good a story as the ones we ultimately make.

 That's OK. Just don't think we are ever really avoiding "editorializing."


Brian Libby said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brian Libby said...

Well said, Barry! I get really fed up with snooty journalists who say blogging is beneath them because it's not the impartial well researched reporting they practice. Even journalism that endeavors to not editorialize does in fact do just that.

Barry Johnson said...

Thanks,Brian. My definition of a reporter: someone who's in it for the inquiry itself and who is an honest broker of the information he or she discovers. The best reporters are creative about the way they research, test their descriptions as much as they can, organize their thoughts in the clearest ways and write prose that delights as it elucidates. In each of those steps,though, it's possible to subvert the "honest broker" part... which is what makes the whole thing a challenge!

chenmeinv0 said...

patriots jerseys
toms outlet
adidas yeezy
polo ralph lauren uk
cheap uggs
thunder jerseys
cheap jordans
oakley sunglasses
louis vuitton handbags
ugg pas cher