by Gibran

Created on: February 19, 2007   Last Updated: April 19, 2007

The journalistic principle of "objectivity" is often presented as at best flawed, and at worst, ideological. This article outlines the various criticisms, and argues that they stem from a misleadingly reductive view of journalistic objectivity, as a fixed set of "action imperatives" or rules of conduct. The article goes on to argue that journalistic objectivity should be viewed as a "virtue imperative" that calls for the cultivation of a particular attitude, one that may be illustrated but not exhaustively defined by rules of conduct. Such a view provides a fresh and promising approach to the common criticisms of journalistic objectivity.

Journalistic norms of objectivity and impartiality arose in the early 20th Century, when they were formalised in codes of practice such as the "canons" of the American Society of Newspaper Editors (ASNE). The ASNE code defines impartiality as "sound practice [which] makes clear distinction between news reports and expressions of opinion", adding that "new reports should be free from opinion or bias of any kind" (Allan, 1997: 308). "Impartiality" is often included in the journalistic concept of "objectivity", which has the added connotation of focusing on incontrovertible, mind-independent and scientifically verifiable facts (Dunlevy, 1998: 120). In practice, the terms "objectivity" and "impartiality" are often used interchangeably by journalists, to refer to notions of balance, fairness, lack of bias, accuracy and neutrality in news production (Dunlevy, 1998: 120).

In this article, "objectivity" will be used as a collective term for these notions, unless otherwise stated. Two schools of thought have developed regarding the status of journalistic objectivity. One which may be called the "conservative school" regards objectivity as a legitimate norm (Berry, 2005; Lichtenberg, 2000), though some members argue that the concept has been mis-applied (Gauthier, 1993), or over-emphasised at the expense of other values such as "watchdog journalism" (Cunningham, 2003). The other "revisionist" school contends that objectivity is a myth that inhibits critical enquiry and legitimates existing structures of power (Overholser, 2004; Rosen, 1993; Schudson, 1978).

The conservative-revisionist split stems from a fundamental difference in epistemologies. Codes of journalistic objectivity emerged in the West at the height of the positivist movement in the Sciences, and such codes reflected the positivist ideals of separation between "fact" and "value",

• 1
• 2
• 3
• ...
• 8
• Next Page >>