Congratulations on your new book Tara! My thought on reading the Shauna Rae essay commentary was 'if you can't get on board with objectivity, what about curiousity? How do you get into journalism as a profession, and not be curious about what the world and the humans in it have to offer, that you don't already know or believe?' Anyhow I put that in the category of Monday-morning head-shakers, and did something more productive, which is pre-order your book and share the news with some friends :)
I saw this trend for quite a while. I discovered 2 Pulitzer awarded journalists, veterans, now teaching who also supported engaged, biased journalism. Someone was saying "since no human can be 100% unbiased they might as well support what they believe in". With the risk of becoming vulgar I will say "since we all get a skid mark in our pants now and then, we might as well smear sh*t all over our clothes".
On another note: I tried to pre-order but their website is a mess - takes me to US site where I had an account and then it doesn't offer me the option to ship to Canada (to Chile or Cayman Islands - YES - but not to Canada).
Broadcast objectivity in the US evolved naturally with radio. The official side of broadcasting began with ship-to-shore radio, which descended directly from lighthouses. (Marconi was working for a British lighthouse agency.) Government had a duty to provide accurate navigation. In the 20s when voice broadcasting became common, the Dept of Commerce (already in charge of navigation) set up rules for radio, continuing the same public service duty to provide accurate facts for citizens. These rules were later formalized as the Fairness Doctrine, and were STRICTLY enforced. Stations that favored one side would lose their license fast. Journalists hated it but obeyed. Reagan revoked the Fairness Doctrine in 1987, and the broadcasters eagerly returned to newspaper-style partisanship.
Congratulations on your new book Tara! My thought on reading the Shauna Rae essay commentary was 'if you can't get on board with objectivity, what about curiousity? How do you get into journalism as a profession, and not be curious about what the world and the humans in it have to offer, that you don't already know or believe?' Anyhow I put that in the category of Monday-morning head-shakers, and did something more productive, which is pre-order your book and share the news with some friends :)
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, PJ, and for supporting the book! :)
Preordered from Wiley.
Many thanks!
Done (re: pre-ordered from Amazon.ca)!
Thanks so much, Nick!
I saw this trend for quite a while. I discovered 2 Pulitzer awarded journalists, veterans, now teaching who also supported engaged, biased journalism. Someone was saying "since no human can be 100% unbiased they might as well support what they believe in". With the risk of becoming vulgar I will say "since we all get a skid mark in our pants now and then, we might as well smear sh*t all over our clothes".
On another note: I tried to pre-order but their website is a mess - takes me to US site where I had an account and then it doesn't offer me the option to ship to Canada (to Chile or Cayman Islands - YES - but not to Canada).
Thanks for flagging the website issue, Andi, have passed that intel along!
Broadcast objectivity in the US evolved naturally with radio. The official side of broadcasting began with ship-to-shore radio, which descended directly from lighthouses. (Marconi was working for a British lighthouse agency.) Government had a duty to provide accurate navigation. In the 20s when voice broadcasting became common, the Dept of Commerce (already in charge of navigation) set up rules for radio, continuing the same public service duty to provide accurate facts for citizens. These rules were later formalized as the Fairness Doctrine, and were STRICTLY enforced. Stations that favored one side would lose their license fast. Journalists hated it but obeyed. Reagan revoked the Fairness Doctrine in 1987, and the broadcasters eagerly returned to newspaper-style partisanship.