In college, one of the degrees I earned was in journalism. A key concept that was drummed into our heads is that the quality reporter remains objective. When you allow your subjective self to become part of the story, then you have committed a cardinal sin.
As an impressionable young man, I initially bought into this abject fiction. I prided myself on my objectivity and stridently defended myself against anyone who suggested that something I reported appeared to be even slightly biased. I kept believing in this "objectivity" fantasy until I became a child abuse investigator.
As I leafed through investigation reports of others and my own reports too, it began to dawn on me that it was impossible to write a thoroughly objective report. The "facts" of each case were influenced greatly by the kind of questions each investigator asked. Even more important was the decision as to which testimony needed to be underscored and which needed to be briefly summarized or, in some cases, omitted entirely.
Every single decision along the way involved the subjective perspective of the investigator and/or investigation team. Information that we deemed impertinent to the specific or general allegations of abuse or neglect was tossed aside -- often much to the consternation of the defense team!
As I began to realize that all child abuse investigations involved a degree of subjectivity, it dawned on me that this same principle applied to the field of journalism as well. A reporter and his/her editor actively shape any event or story reported on. The questions posed or NOT posed influences the presentation of information and, of course, the information presented or NOT presented shapes how the public will view the news itself.
So, I view the handwringing going on at NBC over MSNBC commentator Keith Olbermann to be quite comical. NBC brass believes that Olbermann's private citizen contributions to three democratic candidates during the last election has tarnished the news division's "objectivity". NBC is no more objective than Fox News and the reporters and pundits at Fox News don't even know how to spell the word, objective!
As an impressionable young man, I initially bought into this abject fiction. I prided myself on my objectivity and stridently defended myself against anyone who suggested that something I reported appeared to be even slightly biased. I kept believing in this "objectivity" fantasy until I became a child abuse investigator.
As I leafed through investigation reports of others and my own reports too, it began to dawn on me that it was impossible to write a thoroughly objective report. The "facts" of each case were influenced greatly by the kind of questions each investigator asked. Even more important was the decision as to which testimony needed to be underscored and which needed to be briefly summarized or, in some cases, omitted entirely.
Every single decision along the way involved the subjective perspective of the investigator and/or investigation team. Information that we deemed impertinent to the specific or general allegations of abuse or neglect was tossed aside -- often much to the consternation of the defense team!
As I began to realize that all child abuse investigations involved a degree of subjectivity, it dawned on me that this same principle applied to the field of journalism as well. A reporter and his/her editor actively shape any event or story reported on. The questions posed or NOT posed influences the presentation of information and, of course, the information presented or NOT presented shapes how the public will view the news itself.
So, I view the handwringing going on at NBC over MSNBC commentator Keith Olbermann to be quite comical. NBC brass believes that Olbermann's private citizen contributions to three democratic candidates during the last election has tarnished the news division's "objectivity". NBC is no more objective than Fox News and the reporters and pundits at Fox News don't even know how to spell the word, objective!
i agree, i was part of my college's newspaper journalism team for a semester, and i saw firsthand the subjectivity of the stories. first, in WHAT stories are selected, and then in HOW the stories are processed. i only wrote about sports, so it wasn't too critical a difference but even in the more mundane stories, bias is evident.
ReplyDeleteI agree. Science, like journalism, likes to pretend it can be objective, but both quantum physics and common sense proves that to be a lie. We are 100% enmeshed and entangled in this world, and even the partial objectivity we acheive in science is possible only because we are first and foremost subjective beings, having experiences.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very important issue in my mind, and one of science's biggest blinders, and I think if this fact is fully appreciated it will go a long way towards breaking down the barriers of what we call "science" and "spirituality" and allowing us a fuller understanding of reality.