Final Question 1

Objectivity is a difficult issue to address in journalism because it means different things to different people. To better understand it, I think of objectivity on two levels—objectivity in reporting-based journalism, and objectivity in opinion-based journalism. In reporting-based journalism, there is a general expectation that stories will be reported with an emphasis on the simple facts of the story, with perhaps only moderate analysis. In this case, the most important feature is clarity. Jeffrey Scheuer says, "It is hard to achieve much certainty, objectivity, or neutrality in any enterprise. . .that involves the use of language. Language itself is a vast, complex array of choices, and choice is the quintessence of subjectivity" (2008, 73). In this instance, journalists should simply try their hardest to use the plainest language available in presenting a story. Opinion-based objectivity is a completely different realm of journalism. Political commentators have fallen under fire recently for their "biased" views of the world and their portrayal of their opinion as fact. However, this is the very nature of their kind of journalism. Here, opinion is perhaps the most interesting and most exciting aspect of journalism and which attracts those who would rather spend their time elsewhere otherwise. As long as such opinions are presented as such, there should be no problem in objectivity. The main issue in both types of objectivity is this: are you acknowledging your biases upfront, or are you cloaking them in an attempt to pass them as fact? Opinionated journalism can surely be objective, since people are able to see them for what they are, and subsequently can view them "objectively."