Hunting Objectivity

I believe that truly objective news is a mythical creature. There is always bias in reporting because the stories are composed by people. People come with their own biases, views, and perspectives. These are the hermeneutics through which we view the world and all that happens in it . Absolute neutrality can only occur serendipitously if a journalist has no opinion on the topic, which probably means they don't know enough about the subject matter to inform others. Ignorance is blissful objectivity, and makes for poor journalism.

Rather than seeking the rare Jackalope Unicorn species of objective news, I try to get a broad spectrum of reporting on the same subject from many different sources, (CNN, Fox, Reuters, Associated Press, Russia Today, India Times, The Guardian, Al Jazeera, Beijing Times Japan Times, etc.) from as many different mediums as possible (print, radio, internet, alternative media). The more viewpoints from which you can gather information, the closer you are to truth.

A few lessons I have learned over the years:

#1. The more heart rending or emotional a story is, the further it is from truth. Many times this is sensationalism sold as journalism. Who, what, when, where, and why are the queries that must be answered.  When they offer facts, as a prima facie case for how to interpret or how you should feel about the facts is when journalism dies and propaganda begins.

#2. Never dismiss a news source as being pure propaganda. This would eliminate all news sources. Even propaganda is informative as long as you have the counter-propaganda at your disposal. You can "triangulate" the truth with enough data points (sources).

#3. Whenever the media has you myopically focused on one thing, look everywhere else. Something big is happening elsewhere and everyone else is missing it.

Good luck. You're on your own,

Michael