Cliquer sur une vignette pour aller sur Google Books.
Chargement... Just the Facts: How "Objectivity" Came to Define American Journalismpar David T. Z. Mindich
Chargement...
Inscrivez-vous à LibraryThing pour découvrir si vous aimerez ce livre Actuellement, il n'y a pas de discussions au sujet de ce livre. aucune critique | ajouter une critique
If American journalism were a religion, as it has been called, then its supreme deity would be "objectivity." The high priests of the profession worship the concept, while the iconoclasts of advocacy journalism, new journalism, and cyberjournalism consider objectivity a golden calf. Meanwhile, a groundswell of tabloids and talk shows and the increasing infringement of market concerns make a renewed discussion of the validity, possibility, and aim of objectivity a crucial pursuit. Despite its position as the orbital sun of journalistic ethics, objectivity--until now--has had no historian. David T. Z. Mindich reaches back to the nineteenth century to recover the lost history and meaning of this central tenet of American journalism. His book draws on high profile cases, showing the degree to which journalism and its evolving commitment to objectivity altered-and in some cases limited--the public's understanding of events and issues. Mindich devotes each chapter to a particular component of this ethic-detachment, nonpartisanship, the inverted pyramid style, facticity, and balance. Through this combination of history and cultural criticism, Mindich provides a profound meditation on the structure, promise, and limits of objectivity in the age of cybermedia. Aucune description trouvée dans une bibliothèque |
Discussion en coursAucun
Google Books — Chargement... GenresClassification décimale de Melvil (CDD)071.3Information Journalism And Publishing North America United StatesClassification de la Bibliothèque du CongrèsÉvaluationMoyenne:
Est-ce vous ?Devenez un(e) auteur LibraryThing. |
For his part Mindich walks his reader through the development and implementation of several strategies adopted in the persuit of that holy grail, objective journalism. This included things like detachment, non-partisanship, the inverted paramid, facticity and balance. These characteristics can be identified and tracked, but objectivity itself is far trickier to identify and define.
While the reader mostly sees improvement in the journalism as these techniques are introduced at the no point do we see true objectivity. Some come closer to the ideal than others, but those scare quotes around "Objectivity" on the coveer of the book are no accident. As it goes with ideals, objectivity itself is almost certainly unattainable. The virtue is in the pursuit of the ideal, the trap in thinking we ever have or ever will attain it. Chew on this for a minute it:
"Newpapers and wire services had embraced "objectivity" and the idea that reality lies between competing truth claims. But the idea that the world can be seen without human filters is, of course, problematic. For example, the New York Times and other papers attempted to "balance" their coverage of lynching: on the one hand lynching is evil, on the other hand 'Negroes are prone' to rape."
So you see, while there are steps one can use in pursuit objective writing, the genuine article is not something that can be produced by a simple application of rules. Readers and writers both are human and have a limited number of perspectives and interpretations with which we struggle to define a truth that transcends both. So as a reader, maybe don't fetishize or romanticize objectivity so much. Just put on your critical thinking hat and do the best you can. ( )