To set the standard at objectivity rather than fairness denies the reality of what it is to be a person. It’s silly and naive and insulting to news consumers. It greets them with phoniness and it encourages distrust.
-
-
Show this thread
-
Every time a news organization sacrifices an employee because an online mob demanded it — which happens regardless of ideological motive, from the NYT to the AP — they confirm that optics outweigh all other concerns and they invite more bad faith campaigns against journalists.
Show this thread -
I’m lucky that I work at a magazine and my work, in the grand tradition of the last 50 years of “new journalism,” is highly subjective — not motivated by political ideology, but by my sense of right and wrong, of justice, of taste, of humor.
Show this thread -
I think of my work like I’m asking
@NYMag’s readers to come with me to see something or meet someone, to hang out try to understand with me. It’s not perfect, I fuck up. But it’s honest. I get to be there, wherever there is, & that’s a privilege & responsibility (& fucking cool).Show this thread -
When I meet people at political events who are skeptical or openly hostile to the press (these are not just conservatives, though I have covered the right more often than other factions over the last six years, so my sample is prob skewed), it often starts off with accusations...
Show this thread -
Like, you’re not really “objective” you don’t really cover “both sides” equally, you’re a corporate media shill, etc. And usually (unless the situation feels unsafe) I’ll be like, “yeah, that’s fair. I’m not and I don’t.” lol. And then we can have a real conversation, sometimes.
Show this thread -
I understand that not every reporter has this freedom/not every news organization would benefit from radical transparency on the part of individual journalists. Straight news (by which I mean “who, what, where, when” etc, no personal voice, no “I”) is necessary and valuable.
Show this thread -
But news organizations & other liberal institutions are so vulnerable to bad faith attacks, to what some people would call “cancel culture,” because they promote a myth that members can & should be perfect vessels untainted by complication or belief, rather than human beings.
Show this thread -
And it’s like maintaining this lie means the whole enterprise is highly fragile, and any perceived weak link has got to be removed quickly before the whole place collapses under scrutiny. These companies want to stop the bleeding. It’s all PR. It’s denial. It’s bullshit.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Paraphrasing Penn Jillette from a while back, "I'd rather get my news from a guy who opens every broadcast saying George W Bush can do no wrong than a guy pretending to have no positions since at least I know how to read between the lines on what the first guy is telling me."
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
Olivia.Nuzzi@NYMag.com