af194506@ohio.edu
Throughout the course of Journalism 412, we have touched on many issues. Do you print a picture that could offend a large portion of your audience? At what point does a journalist get too involved in a story? How far is too far? But, perhaps the hardest question to answer is where do you draw the line between reporter and human being?
Drawing the line
The general rule of journalism is objectivity. All personal opinions, beliefs, and experiences are to be checked at the newsroom door. But, when you're covering politics, the line between objectivity and subjectivity gets blurred. In his article In the Tank: Did the Press Help Elect Barack Obama, Douglas McCollam writes, "the real issue is how and whether [a journalist's] political inclination translates into biased coverage."
Is it possible to ignore your personal opinions in your coverage? During our discussions in class, we've come to find that it is simply impossible. Someone gets covered more than the other: a story is written that puts one candidate in a better light. Avoiding political inclination and even the insertion of it into a story is impossible. Avoiding bias, however, is another story.
Numbers Don't Lie
The same article reported that during the last presidential race President Barack Obama received far more balanced news than candidate John McCain. The article reported 57 percent negative articles about McCain, compared to Obama's 29 percent.
Numbers do not lie: neither do your true feelings. As the numbers show, political opinions can't be ignored in media coverage. And while it's expected that they are, is it really possible? Full networks are commonly associated with one-side of the political fence. If viewers can choose what station to tune into and what paper to read, why can't reporters of certain political inclinations do the same?
No comments:
Post a Comment