I love hearing people say that Journalism used to be better and more "fact based" at some previous moment in history.
CHALLENGE!
If you hold the faith-based belief that American Journalism used to be objective ... please state clearly the Year/Date that you're pointing to. Maybe leave a comment here with a link to an article or video - an example of "fact-based" "objective" journalism, from any time period. I'd love to see and interrogate what you mean.
The problem is that our entire learned framework for assessing Truth based on compiling lists of supposed "facts" is flimsy. "Fact Based Journalism" is definitely better than "Pure Lies Journalism" ... but "Fact Based Journalism" is just science-y sounding rhetoric, it's not a good bar.
WHY?? Because Journalism is Storytelling, and storytellers have the power of multiple points of influence, to focus attention and tell the story they AIM to tell.
Fact RELATIVITY - Each "fact" will need to be interpreted, or understood within a broader context, and with contrast against other "facts".
Facts expressed through LANGUAGE - The storyteller invariably crafts a story using language, definitions and subtext that is available to them. Their goals and self interests will be expressed in their choices. They will employ euphemisms, passive voice vs Direct language, clarifying thorough depth in expression.
Fact OMISSION - The relevant "facts" in any narrative-story (Journalism) were narrowly chosen by a human or group of humans. Anyone can offer an impressive list of Thirty "facts" and still give a misleading story by omitting "fact" number Thirty-One.
The reality of what IS includes not just a small set of "facts", but ALL "facts" ... including harder to discern "facts", like intent.
If you disagree with anything I've written here ... Accept the CHALLENGE above, and leave a comment explaining where you feel I'm wrong.
-Billy
Comments