Today 30 November 2020, Monday - Last updated at 29 November 2020
babasının taş gibi bir kadını bulup evlenmeye karar vermesi porno ve onu bir de kendi yaşadıkları eve getirmesi sonucunda mobil porno hayalini kurduğu seksi kadının üvey annesi gibi sex hikayeleri olduğunu fark eden genç adam seks tecrübesinin ve üst sex izle seviye olduğu dışarıdan bakıldığında çok net şekilde porno seyret belli olan üvey annesini hayal edip 31 çekerek düşlerken porno izle odanın oradan geçen mature üvey oğlunu görür Odaya hd porno gelip sikini kimin için kaldırdığını soran üvey annesiyle porno farkında olmadan yakınlaşan genç adam boşalmak mobil porno izle için olgun bir kadının hayallerini kurduğunu söyleyince mature porno izle sikini eline alıp amına sokmadan çıplak şekilde üzerine çıktı
Abonamente

News 20 July 2020, at 10:26

How objectivity in journalism became a matter of opinion

Marime Font

In America, political and commercial strains have led to questions about its value and meaning

Have you heard the news? It’s about the news. As correspondents covered the widespread protests on the streets of America in recent months, many were engaged in a parallel protest of their own—against their employers. On private Slack channels, public Twitter feeds and in op-ed columns, journalists revolted. Editors apologised, promised change and in some cases were sacked, their downfall promptly written up in their own papers.

The immediate cause of this rebellion is race: how it is reported and how it is represented among staff. More than 150 Wall Street Journal employees signed a letter saying that they “find the way we cover race to be problematic”. Over 500 at the Washington Post endorsed demands for “combating racism and discrimination” at the paper. Journalists at the New York Times tweeted that a senator’s op-ed advocating a show of military force to restore order “puts black @nytimes staff in danger”.

Loading...


But at the heart of many of these arguments is another disagreement, about the nature and purpose of journalism. As a Bloomberg employee is said to have remarked at a recent meeting, reporters are meant to be objective, but to many the distinction between right and wrong now seems obvious. A new generation of journalists is questioning whether, in a hyper-partisan, digital world, objectivity is even desirable. “American view-from-nowhere, ‘objectivity’-obsessed, both-sides journalism is a failed experiment,” tweeted Wesley Lowery, a Pulitzer-winning 30-year-old now at cbs News. The dean of Columbia Journalism School described objectivity as an “inherited shibboleth” in a message to students. The Columbia Journalism Review pondered: “What comes after we get rid of objectivity in journalism?”

Objectivity hasn’t always been a journalistic ideal. Early American newspapers read a bit like today’s blogs, says Tom Rosenstiel of the American Press Institute (api), an industry group. Benjamin Franklin’s Pennsylvania Gazette and Alexander Hamilton’s Gazette of the United States were unashamedly partisan. As they sought wider audiences in the 19th century, newspapers became more concerned with what they called “realism”. Some of this was provided by the Associated Press (ap), founded in 1846, which supplied stories to papers of diverse political leanings and so stuck to the facts. As the news pages became more even-handed, publishers established editorial pages, on which they could continue to back their favoured politicians.

Hot takes and alternative facts
Only in the 1920s did objectivity truly gain currency. “A Test of the News”, by Walter Lippmann and Charles Merz, found that the New York Times’ coverage of the Russian revolution was rife with what today might be called unconscious bias. “In the large, the news about Russia is a case of seeing not what was, but what men wished to see,” they wrote. At the same time, as communism advanced, Joseph Pulitzer’s view of the centrality of journalism to democracy—“Our Republic and its press will rise or fall together”—gained adherents. These lofty aims overlapped with commercial ones. Advertisers wanted less partisan coverage to sit alongside their messages.

And so objectivity became journalism’s new lodestar. As Lippmann put it, the journalist should “remain clear and free of his irrational, his unexamined, his unacknowledged prejudgments in observing, understanding and presenting the news.”

A century later, four trends have put this principle under strain. (The Economist, a British publication, has grappled with most of them.) One is Donald Trump’s rise and the challenges it has posed to traditional reporting. Some of his statements can be accurately described as lies, or as racist. But such words are so seldom used of sitting presidents—except by partisans—that writers and editors have reached for euphemisms. After Mr Trump told four non-white congresswomen to “go back” to the “crime-infested places from which they came”, the Wall Street Journal called his words “racially charged”; the Times plumped for “racially infused”.

The Trump era has also exposed problems with journalistic notions of balance. Giving equal weight to both sides of an argument is an easy shortcut to appearing objective. Yet this “bothsidesism” has sometimes come to seem misleading. At an impeachment hearing in December, “the lawmakers from the two parties could not even agree on a basic set of facts in front of them,” reported the Times. Which facts were real? Readers were left to guess.

A second cause of doubts about objectivity is the changing make-up of the American newsroom. Amid more diverse recruitment, the share of the Times’ editorial staff who are white is falling; the proportion who are women is rising. Not only has this sharpened sensitivity to odd phrases like “racially infused”; it has also made some wonder if the “objective” viewpoint is in fact a white, male one. The “view from nowhere” is just the view of “a white guy who doesn’t even exist”, Dan Froomkin, an outspoken media critic, has argued.

Concerns like these might in the past have remained on the shop floor. But a third factor—the rise of social media—has given dissenters a megaphone. It has also highlighted the contrast between the detached style journalists are meant to adopt in print and the personal approach many employ online—something bosses seem unsure whether to encourage or deter. Readers, for their part, are bathed on the web in highly partisan content that whets their appetite for more opinionated news. The division between news and comment, clear on paper in American journalism, dissolves on the internet. A study for the api in 2018 found that 75% of Americans could easily tell news from opinion in their favoured outlet, but only 43% could on Twitter or Facebook.

Keeping up appearances
The final reason for the turn against objectivity is commercial. The shift away from partisanship a century ago was driven partly by advertisers. Today, as ad revenues leak away to search engines and social networks, newspapers have come to rely more on paying readers. Unlike advertisers, readers love opinion. Moreover, digital publication means American papers no longer compete regionally, but nationally. “The local business model was predicated on dominating coverage of a certain place; the national business model is about securing the loyalties of a certain kind of person,” wrote Ezra Klein of Vox. Left-leaning New Yorkers may switch to the Washington Post if the Times upsets them. The incentive to keep readers happy—and the penalty for failing—are greater than ever.

These pressures are changing the way newspapers report. Last year ap’s style book declared: “Do not use racially charged or similar terms as euphemisms for racist or racism when the latter terms are truly applicable.” Some organisations have embraced, even emblazoned taboo words: “A Fascist Trump Rally In Greenville” ran a headline last year in the Huffington Post. Others are inserting more value judgments into their copy. A front-page news piece in the Times this month began:

President Trump used the spotlight of the Fourth of July weekend to sow division during a national crisis, denying his failings in containing the worsening coronavirus pandemic while delivering a harsh diatribe against what he branded the “new far-left fascism”.

Disenchanted with objectivity, some journalists have alighted on a new ideal: “moral clarity”. The phrase, initially popularised on the right, has been adopted by those who want newspapers to make clearer calls on matters such as racism. Mr Lowery repeatedly used the phrase in a recent Times op-ed, in which he called for the industry “to abandon the appearance of objectivity as the aspirational journalistic standard, and for reporters instead to focus on being fair and telling the truth, as best as one can, based on the given context and available facts.” The editor of the Times, Dean Baquet, called Mr Lowery’s column “terrific” in an interview with the “Longform” podcast. Objectivity has been “turned into a cartoon”, he said. Better to aim for values such as fairness, independence and empathy.

Back in the 1920s, Lippmann might have agreed with much of this. He saw objectivity not as a magical state of mind or a view from nowhere, but as a practical process. Journalism should aim for “a common intellectual method and a common area of valid fact”, he wrote. That does not mean using euphemisms in place of plain language, or parroting both sides of an argument without testing them. Indeed, when journalism has erred in recent years, it has often done so by misinterpreting objectivity, rather than upholding it. The most persuasive calls for moral clarity today articulate something close to Lippmann’s original conception of objectivity.

The danger is that advocates of moral clarity slide self-righteously towards crude subjectivity. This week Bari Weiss, a Times editor, resigned, criticising what she said was the new consensus at the paper: “that truth isn’t a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else.” Earlier Mr Rosenstiel warned, in a largely supportive response to Mr Lowery’s column, that “if journalists replace a flawed understanding of objectivity by taking refuge in subjectivity and think their opinions have more moral integrity than genuine inquiry, journalism will be lost.”

As reporters learn more about a subject, he adds, the truth tends to become less clear, not more so. Recognising and embracing the uncertainty means being humble—but not timid.

https://www.economist.com/books-and-arts/2020/07/16/how-objectivity-in-journalism-became-a-matter-of-opinion?fbclid=IwAR0VrrWcpKbeA5sUaghnXeWMM0T5wlyicc1UgzD15Oddj54UE2YWoeFFhHM

 

 Urmărește știrile Timpul.md pe Telegram
blog comments powered by Disqus

Din aceeaşi secţiune

Cele mai noi ştiri de azi

News 23 November 2020, ora: 12:34

7 dead in Russia for drinking hand sanitizer after running out of liquor — reports

7 dead in Russia for drinking hand sanitizer after running out of liquor — reports

 Seven people died from methanol (wood alcohol) poisoning after drinking hand sanitizer at a party in Russia. Nine people, with ages ranging from 27 to 69 years old, were partying when they opted to drink hand sanitizer after running out of alcoholic beverages, according to local Russian...

( ) Read all

News 1 November 2020, ora: 06:40

Danube Logistics: Chisinau Appeals Court declares Bemol's actions against Danube Logistics unlawful

Danube Logistics: Chisinau Appeals Court declares Bemol's actions against Danube Logistics unlawful

 The Chisinau Appeals Court has declared Bemol's actions against Danube Logistics unlawful, according to a press release of Danube Logistics SRL and Danube Logistics Holding BV.

( ) Read all

News 3 October 2020, ora: 20:41

Dainius Žalimas The decision of the Constitutional Court of Belarus is an arbitrary act

The decision of the  Constitutional Court of Belarus is an arbitrary act

 On 25 August 2020 the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Belarus (thereinafter – the CCRB) adopted a document entitled the “Constitutional Legal Position on the Protection of the Constitutional Order” (Kонституционно-правовaя позиция по...

( ) Read all

News 21 September 2020, ora: 08:07

FinCEN Files: Deutsche Bank tops list of suspicious transactions

FinCEN Files: Deutsche Bank tops list of suspicious transactions

Leaked documents shed a light on Deutsche Bank's central role in facilitating financial transactions deemed suspicious. Many of these could have enabled the circumvention of sanctions on Iran and Russia.

( ) Read all

News 8 September 2020, ora: 09:11

How the Red Terror set a macabre course for the Soviet Union

How the Red Terror set a macabre course for the Soviet Union

In 1918, the Bolshevik regime launched a state-sanctioned campaign of mass killings and detentions to silence political enemies—laying the foundation for decades of violence in the U.S.S.R.

( ) Read all

News 4 September 2020, ora: 22:58

Lithuania to sanction Belarus’ Constitutional Court officials

Lithuania to sanction Belarus’ Constitutional Court officials

 Lithuania may impose national sanctions on officials from the Belarusian Constitutional Court, Lithuanian President Gitanas Nausėda said on Thursday.

( ) Read all

News 26 August 2020, ora: 10:54

How Romania is Handling Cybersecurity Threats

How Romania is Handling Cybersecurity Threats

In 2013, Romania approved a national cybersecurity strategy and began its implementation. It wasn't the only EU country to take action. 

( ) Read all

Politics 1 July 2020, ora: 10:19

What Vladimir Putin Tells Us about His Relations with the West

What Vladimir Putin Tells Us about His Relations with the West

Putin claims the EU resolution is part of “a deliberate policy aimed at destroying the postwar world order.” The truth is less dramatic and more illuminating.

( ) Read all

News 12 June 2020, ora: 12:33

Foreign Policy New Report Exposes Brutal Methods of Russia’s Wagner Group

New Report Exposes Brutal Methods of Russia’s Wagner Group

 How a shady network of operatives serves as the tip of the spear in Russia’s global influence efforts with almost no accountability.

( ) Read all

News 3 June 2020, ora: 10:55

EU’s top diplomat says no to Russia rejoining G7

EU’s top diplomat says no to Russia rejoining G7

 The European Union doesn't think Russia should rejoin the G7.

( ) Read all

News 27 May 2020, ora: 19:30

Moldovan court facilitates attempt to expropriate European investment in Moldova’s Seaport

Moldovan court facilitates attempt to expropriate European investment in Moldova’s Seaport

 On 12 May 2020 the Chișinău Appeals Court barred Danube Logistics SRL from transferring funds to its Dutch shareholder Danube Logistics Holding BV. Danube Logistics SRL is the operator of Giurgiulești International Free Port located on the maritime section of the Danube. 

( ) Read all

News 8 May 2020, ora: 19:55

Russian city removes “untruthful” plaque commemorating thousands of Poles murdered by Soviets

Russian city removes “untruthful” plaque commemorating thousands of Poles murdered by Soviets

 On the building that once housed the local headquarters of the Soviet secret police in the Russian city of Tver, where 80 years ago thousands of Polish prisoners of war were murdered, plaques commemorating the victims of Stalinist crimes were today removed.

( ) Read all

News 6 May 2020, ora: 12:12

German court lays down EU law

German court lays down EU law

 That is the message the country's Constitutional Court sent to the European Union on Tuesday as it delivered a landmark ruling on the legality of the European Central Bank’s bond-buying programs, a decision many observers say challenges both the independence of the ECB and the...

( ) Read all

News 5 May 2020, ora: 18:55

Who’s Afraid of Boris Nemtsov?

Who’s Afraid of Boris Nemtsov?

 New developments in Prague, involving a suitcase of ricin and a diplomatic spat, suggest that Putin still is afraid—over five years after Nemtsov’s grisly demise.

( ) Read all

News 4 May 2020, ora: 13:02

Table for one? Sweden pop-up restaurant to serve solo diners only

Table for one? Sweden pop-up restaurant to serve solo diners only

The cost of a three-course meal at Bord For En (Table For One), a pop-up restaurant in Sweden opening May 10, is left to the diner's discretion. And that is diner, singular, just like the restaurant's name suggests.

( ) Read all
Current tier / breakpoint: xs sm md lg xl (= visible only on this breakpoint)

.hidden-xs-down .hidden-sm-down .hidden-md-down .hidden-lg-down

.hidden-xs-up .hidden-sm-up .hidden-md-up .hidden-lg-up .hidden-xl

.hidden-xs (only) .hidden-sm (only) .hidden-md (only) .hidden-lg (only) .hidden-xl (only)