Meredith W
Recent Activity
Meredith W commented on Nicholas Lemann: Can journalists be objective? on March 13, 2008, 8:50 PM
Nyarlathotep--First, it's absurd for anyone to think that an individual can be free of bias or personal belief structure. That's simple fantasy. The question would be whether or not a process/structure can be created that helps to minimize the impact of said individual bias or belief structure.And to call simply presenting "two sides" of a story "journalism" is equally absurd. If a Democrat says that the recent FISA bill says one thing and Republicans say it says another, there's no way for me, as an individual, to determine who's lying and who's not. I need one of two things to happen. Either the journalist needs to fact-check what the two sides say or I need an easy way to access the original information myself. Often, journalism fails on both these counts and I'm left to wonder.
Meredith W commented on What inspires you? on March 13, 2008, 5:28 PM
I wish more journalists understood that their job is to sort out good information from bad rather than just presenting it all. Of course, in the sorting, there are judgment calls to be made about what's good and what's bad, and that process should include some rules that can be communicated to news consumers. I'm not sure if there was a point in time when citizens could ever trust journalistic standards and integrity, but we know that, right now, we can't really. Like we do in government, we need more transparency in the news. I think it's coming but very slowly and reticently.
Meredith W commented on Nicholas Lemann: Can journalists be objective? on March 13, 2008, 4:50 PM
Nyarlathotep--First, it's absurd for anyone to think that an individual can be free of bias or personal belief structure. That's simple fantasy. The question would be whether or not a process/structure can be created that helps to minimize the impact of said individual bias or belief structure. And to call simply presenting "two sides" of a story "journalism" is equally absurd. If a Democrat says that the recent FISA bill says one thing and Republicans say it says another, there's no way for me, as an individual, to determine who's lying and who's not. I need one of two things to happen. Either the journalist needs to fact-check what the two sides say or I need an easy way to access the original information myself. Often, journalism fails on both these counts and I'm left to wonder.
Meredith W commented on Nicholas Lemann: Can journalists be objective? on February 7, 2008, 7:37 PM
This argument seemed a little convoluted to me. Are we supposed to try to be non-judgmental or judgmental in our quest for objectivity? Or is being objective another way of being critical?I would agree that some type of conversation is needed in order to achieve a level of objectivity, but I don't know that today's journalists are participating in that conversation in the same way academics are (at least not as critically). Today's journalists often admit, even among themselves, that there is a tendency for them to think as a whole. For the first or loudest voice on a subject to sway the group. I've even seen numerous defenses (some verbal, some written) by journalists of the "neutral" role that they think they play in presenting "both sides" of an argument without investigation or judgment or critical thought.And right now, it seems that average Americans have a different understanding of the role of journalists than most journalists seem to have. I suspect that this difference is what accounts for the general lack of agreement on the role of "objectivity" as well. As a news consumer, I would like to get a clearer sense of the standards that journalism is supposed to meet. And I would like to see more context and more direct source citation in most basic news story. In short, for every story I read, I want to feel satisfied that I'm actually learning something--not just being presented with two different perspectives and supposed to conclude that the "truth" is somewhere in the middle.
Meredith W commented on What inspires you? on March 13, 2008, 9:28 PM
I wish more journalists understood that their job is to sort out good information from bad rather than just presenting it all. Of course, in the sorting, there are judgment calls to be made about what's good and what's bad, and that process should include some rules that can be communicated to news consumers. I'm not sure if there was a point in time when citizens could ever trust journalistic standards and integrity, but we know that, right now, we can't really. Like we do in government, we need more transparency in the news. I think it's coming but very slowly and reticently.