photo taken from designthinkingblog.com
Is unbiased journalism possible?
Note: Comments are moderated so be sure that your responses are expressed in a respectable and friendly way. We are here to express our thoughts toward controversial issues, not to scold or defame anyone. Watch what you say, and remember that by using this site, you agree to our Terms Of Use and Privacy Policy.
I don't think so. People go into journalism because they want their views heard. Everyone is biased, so unless you are having a machine or a computer write the news, then you are going to have it.
Total unbias is not very likely but not necessary to give fair and balanced news coverage. Just being willing to address both sides of an issue is possible, even if one is biased, but very few "news" organizations bother to do that these days.
I would disagree with this. It makes no sense to give equal coverage to "both sides" of an issue where the facts indicate there are not two equal sides. You don't air 5 minutes of a holocaust denier in the wake of say, the shooting earlier this year at the Holocaust Museum, and balance that with 5 minutes covering the views from a holocaust survivor.
More to the point, I don't think any "news" organisations do that these days. All of them present a particular viewpoint, even if it becomes schizophrenic when their editorials show up for the evening. The problem is the lack of filtering out these non-factually based stories that come up in the country.
I don't remember the exact person or time I heard about this, but there was this guy who made millions off of and is known as the mastermind of all the sick stories that we hear in the news of rapes, murders. I'm trying to remember who this person was and what exactly he did, but it's not coming to mind right now.
There's also a reporter in central America who went around paying for people to be raped or assaulted so he could scoop the stories.
How sick do you have to be to actually go down to that level?
The human mind will never allow someone to be unbiased.
The question should be "Is journalism possible?"
What is now being passed of as journalism is a total farce. What is the point of walking up to a mother who just had her infant baby shot and killed by a "stray" bullet and asking her on camera "How do you feel?"
Not to mention the total ignoring of the mullions of people protesting our out of control hell-bent-on-socialism government.
There is no such thing as journalism anymore.
Just my not-so-humble opinion.
No, there is no need to air both sides when there are facts to prove something is false. But there is a reason to air the FACTS on both sides and most political news does have 2 sides.
When they report on a piece of legislation they are not reporting as to whether or not the bill is true or a lie, they are reporting about whether or not it will pass. Whether or not the country wants hat bill depends upon what a person thinks about it based upon what that person's own beliefs, party affiliation, etc. Why a bill is good or bad needs to be presented FROM BOTH SIDES so that we can then determine do we really want it or not. It is up to us, not the media, as to whether or not we want the bill, or at least it should be.
No. Even hard news is biased even by the person who is telling it. The fact that it is being told the way it is shows bias.
The question makes it sound like there is only one of two solutions, perfectly unbiased or raving dogma. I'd be happy with journalists that understood their own bias and were selfless enough to appreciate the opinions of others. But that doesn't describe the high paid news people who all have egos half way to the moon. So I'm not so sure people would want such ideal journalists if they existed. I think the journalists we get reflect our own biases. it's hard to confront ones own bias. Anytime someone starts talking about "just read the facts and decide for yourself!" I turn them off because I know they have a strong bias one way or another. I am always impressed with someone that can talk about both the good and bad of both sides of a complex subject. (The previous example of the guy that shot someone at the Holocaust Museum doesn't count as a complex subject)