tag:theconversation.com,2011:/ca/topics/objectivity-21700/articlesObjectivity – The Conversation2023-01-24T13:22:32Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1969192023-01-24T13:22:32Z2023-01-24T13:22:32ZLots of people believe in Bigfoot and other pseudoscience claims – this course examines why<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505185/original/file-20230118-22-sxk00c.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=11%2C0%2C1979%2C997&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Don't believe the hype about Bigfoot, a flat Earth or ancient aliens.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Collage from Getty Images sources</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="Text saying: Uncommon Courses, from The Conversation" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499014/original/file-20221205-17-kcwec8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/499014/original/file-20221205-17-kcwec8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499014/original/file-20221205-17-kcwec8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499014/original/file-20221205-17-kcwec8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499014/original/file-20221205-17-kcwec8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499014/original/file-20221205-17-kcwec8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/499014/original/file-20221205-17-kcwec8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/topics/uncommon-courses-130908">Uncommon Courses</a> is an occasional series from The Conversation U.S. highlighting unconventional approaches to teaching.</em> </p>
<h2>Title of course</h2>
<p>“Psychology of Pseudoscience”</p>
<h2>What prompted the idea for the course?</h2>
<p>While teaching a course on research methods at the United States Air Force Academy, I concluded that the course needed a bigger emphasis on broad scientific reasoning skills.</p>
<p>So I incorporated material about the difference between science – the <a href="https://sciencecouncil.org/about-science/our-definition-of-science/">systematic process of evidence-based inquiry</a> – and <a href="https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/P/bo15996988.html">pseudoscience</a>, which is the promotion of unreliable scientific claims as if they are more reliable than other explanations. </p>
<p>I wanted to understand why people promote claims that conflict with science. I jumped at the opportunity to develop this type of course at SUNY Cortland.</p>
<h2>What does the course explore?</h2>
<p>We look at some of the common scientific reasoning failures that pseudoscience exploits. These include <a href="https://aiptcomics.com/2021/02/01/stormtroopers-science-evidence-anecdotes/">hand-picking anecdotes</a> to support a belief, <a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pseudo-science/">developing a set of beliefs</a> that explain every possible outcome, <a href="https://skepticalinquirer.org/2017/05/vaccines-autism-and-the-promotion-of-irrelevant-research-a-science-pseudosc/">promoting irrelevant research</a>, <a href="https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/P/bo15996988.html">ignoring contradictory information</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614567356">believing in unsubstantiated conpiracies</a>.</p>
<p>We particularly highlight <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480">motivated reasoning</a>, the tendency for people to process information in a way that helps them confirm what they already want to believe. For example, someone might accept scientific consensus about cancer treatments but question it with regard to vaccines – even though both are supported by strong scientific evidence and expert consensus. </p>
<p>We also review <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.50.6.1141">group polarization</a>, in which people develop more extreme positions after interacting with similarly minded group members.</p>
<p>Some of the topics we examine include the <a href="https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/yes-flat-earthers-really-do-exist/">flat-Earth</a> belief, <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/denying-evolution-9780878936595?cc=us&lang=en&">creationism</a>, <a href="https://skepticalinquirer.org/2002/03/bigfoot-at-50-evaluating-a-half-century-of-bigfoot-evidence/">Bigfoot and other cryptozoology ideas</a>, <a href="https://skepticalinquirer.org/2022/02/the-great-australian-psychic-prediction-project-pondering-the-published-predictions-of-prominent-psychics/">psychic ability</a>, <a href="https://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/therapeutic-response.pdf">conversion therapy</a>, <a href="http://cup.columbia.edu/book/vaccines-and-your-child/9780231153072">anti-vaccination</a>, <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/318419a0">astrology</a>, <a href="https://skepticalinquirer.org/2003/01/amityville-the-horror-of-it-all/">ghosts</a> and <a href="http://cup.columbia.edu/book/the-madhouse-effect/9780231177863">climate change denial</a>.</p>
<p>Students complete two papers to reinforce their knowledge. First, students develop their own bogus scientific claims and a corresponding plan to convince people that their claims are legitimate. Allowing students to invent and promote novel forms of pseudoscience gives them a safe context in which to examine specious scientific arguments.</p>
<p>Second, students review old issues of <a href="https://skepticalinquirer.org/">Skeptical Inquirer</a>, the leading national magazine about science and critical thinking, to summarize the topics that were being addressed at that time. Students also dive more deeply into a specific topic like unexplained cattle mutilations or the Bermuda Triangle. Then they write a paper based on an <a href="https://skepticalinquirer.org/2022/12/on-the-origin-of-skeptical-inquirer/">example I recently published</a> in Skeptical Inquirer. I’m hopeful that future column installments will include students’ work.</p>
<h2>Why is this course relevant now?</h2>
<p>The internet has provided pseudoscience communities with the unprecedented ability to promote their false claims.</p>
<p>For instance, flat-Earthers have <a href="https://theconversation.com/i-watched-hundreds-of-flat-earth-videos-to-learn-how-conspiracy-theories-spread-and-what-it-could-mean-for-fighting-disinformation-184589">relied on YouTube</a> to create doubt about Earth as a globe. The Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization uses Facebook to support Bigfoot belief. These platforms take advantage of people’s tendency to believe material posted by their <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2011.620764">friends</a> or <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-011-9219-6">authoritative-sounding sources</a>.</p>
<p>This course is also relevant now because the consequences of poor scientific reasoning are so significant. People who believe these sorts of false claims risk their own health and that of the planet, by <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-17430-6">avoiding helpful, safe vaccines</a> or <a href="http://cup.columbia.edu/book/the-madhouse-effect/9780231177863">useful discussions about the problems presented by climate change</a>.</p>
<h2>What’s a critical lesson from the course?</h2>
<p>It’s important for students to understand that <a href="https://centerforinquiry.org/video/why-were-all-susceptible-to-pseudoscience-craig-foster/">reasonable, intelligent people promote pseudoscience</a>. When people encounter pseudoscience they don’t personally believe, they sometimes conclude that the pseudoscience supporters are unintelligent or mentally unwell. This type of explanation is shortsighted. </p>
<p>Everyday people are drawn into believing pseudoscience because they have limited cognitive resources and they use cognitive strategies, like relying on anecdotes, that can lead to erroneous belief. Human scientific reasoning is particularly flawed when humans really <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/44085270">want to reach a particular conclusion</a>.</p>
<p>Belief in pseudoscience also develops out of social interactions. Friends and family members commonly share their reasons for believing in creationism, ghosts, fad diets and so forth. This type of social influence goes into overdrive when people <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302211050323">join communities that collectively promote pseudoscience</a>. I have attended Bigfoot and flat-Earth conferences. These conferences create powerful social experiences, because so many friendly people are available to explain that Bigfoot is alive or the Earth is flat, both of which are, clearly, false.</p>
<h2>What materials does the course feature?</h2>
<p>The “Defining Pseudoscience and Science” chapter by Sven Ove Hansson in “<a href="https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/P/bo15996988.html">Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem</a>” sets up what I call the psychological puzzle of pseudoscience: How do people convince themselves and others that an unreliable scientific claim is actually reliable?</p>
<p>We also have guest speakers, including philosophy of science scholar <a href="https://massimopigliucci.org/">Massimo Pigliucci</a>, journalist and folklorist <a href="http://benjaminradford.com/">Ben Radford</a>, exposer of psychics <a href="https://skepticalinquirer.org/exclusive/susan-gerbic-back-on-tour/">Susan Gerbic</a>, a local Bigfoot enthusiast, and Janyce Boynton, who discussed <a href="https://www.facilitatedcommunication.org">facilitated communication</a>, a discredited communication technique in which some people physically assist nonverbal people with their communication, for example, by guiding their hands as they type.</p>
<h2>What will the course prepare students to do?</h2>
<p>The course prepares students to identify dubious scientific claims. In so doing, they should <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-018-9513-3">become less vulnerable</a> to being drawn into pseudoscience. The course also enhances familiarity with specific forms of pseudoscience. I expect climate change denial, anti-vaccination and creationism to remain major points of contention in American society for decades. Educated people should understand the discussions that occur around these kind of social problems.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/196919/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Craig Foster is affiliated with facilitatedcommunication.org.
Anything else to declare: I am a Committee for Skeptical Inquiry Fellow.</span></em></p>A university course teaches students why people believe false and evidence-starved claims, to show them how to determine what’s accurate and real and what’s neither.Craig A. Foster, Professor and Chair, Department of Psychology, State University of New York CortlandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1882272022-08-09T06:29:12Z2022-08-09T06:29:12ZWhy The Conversation is committed to non-partisan journalism<p>The world of journalism has been transformed by the internet over the past two decades and many shibboleths have been discarded. </p>
<p>One that for a long time seemed to be destined for the scrap heap was the idea of journalistic objectivity. As journalism academic Jay Rosen has often pointed out, objectivity is a myth and the “view from nowhere” doesn’t exist. Everyone brings a perspective and lived experience to their journalism. </p>
<p>That’s why diversity in newsrooms is so important. </p>
<p>When Donald Trump was elected in 2016 it sparked a big debate in American journalism about how best to combat lies and misinformation propagated under the authority of the presidential seal. Some argued that journalists should become advocates and wear their hearts on their sleeves. This played into Trump’s attempt to cast the traditional quality media as purveyors of fake news. If everyone is seen to be pushing a barrow, if the media is openly antagonistic to one side of politics, then there is no one you can trust. Truth doesn’t matter. Anything goes.</p>
<p>For this reason as the editor of The Conversation, I cling to the unfashionable view that the ideal of non-partisan journalism is vital for democracy. The Conversation exists to provide audiences with quality information on everything from politics to vaccines to how to prepare children for school. But we don’t push agendas and we are not advocates. </p>
<p>I believe it is important to publish articles you can disagree with – as long as they are cogent and evidence-based. Everyone on the editorial team has views about the types of policies and interventions that work best to create a better society and address the existential threat of climate change. But it is not our role to campaign for any one of them. Rather, we aim to keep our own counsel and facilitate the discussion.</p>
<p>Ultimately we believe that the world needs purveyors of quality information who don’t pursue an agenda or ulterior motive. Journalism is a service industry, a public service. We need to serve readers with humility and respect. We need to have the discipline to be self-critical and own up to our mistakes. We need to understand that we perform a small but vital role and that this requires us to stay in our lane.</p>
<p>There are other ways of approaching journalism and there are valid arguments for taking these different approaches. What’s crucial, and what I want to highlight, is that journalists at The Conversation operate under a strong charter that gives us the editorial independence to determine our own path.</p>
<p>The path we have chosen is to create a quality information service for the broad public and public policy experts alike, and to do it to the best of our ability with transparency, humility and respect. </p>
<p>I hope you agree that this is a good way of delivering on our promise and repaying the faith that readers have placed in us.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>This is an edited version of a message recently sent to Friends of The Conversation, donors whose generous contributions underpin the editorial independence discussed above.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/188227/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
It’s important that we acknowledge that objectivity is a myth – everyone brings a valuable perspective and lived experience to their work. But the ideal of non-partisan journalism is vital for democracy.Misha Ketchell, Editor, The ConversationLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1855412022-06-24T10:55:23Z2022-06-24T10:55:23ZThe untold story of Canada’s journalism startups<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/470368/original/file-20220622-34601-35c970.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C4013%2C3024&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Conversation Canada is celebrating its fifth anniversary. It's one of dozens of digital news organizations that has found a niche in the changing media landscape in Canada.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(THE CONVERSATION)</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100px; border: none; position: relative; z-index: 1;" allowtransparency="" allow="clipboard-read; clipboard-write" src="https://narrations.ad-auris.com/widget/the-conversation-canada/the-untold-story-of-canada-s-journalism-startups" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<p>The fifth anniversary of the launch of <em>The Conversation Canada</em> is an opportunity to reflect on an untold story of the Canadian news media.</p>
<p><em>The Conversation Canada</em> is one of more than 120 novel English-language digital-born journalism organizations to launch since 2000. That’s more than the number of daily newspapers that populated the country in the latter part of the 20th century. </p>
<p>In reflecting on the past five years <a href="https://theconversation.com/its-time-to-start-the-conversation-in-canada-79877">as co-founders</a> and journalism researchers, we locate <em>The Conversation Canada</em> as part of <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3621685">an emergent journalism infrastructure</a> populated by a new group of vital contributors who range from cottage industry to larger-sized established organizations. </p>
<p>These players — such as <em><a href="https://thelogic.co/">The Logic</a></em>, <a href="https://mediaindigena.com/"><em>MediaIndigena</em></a>, <a href="https://thenarwhal.ca/"><em>The Narwhal</em></a>, <em><a href="https://www.sprawlcalgary.com/">The Sprawl</a></em>, <em><a href="https://thetyee.ca/">The Tyee</a></em> and <em><a href="https://www.villagemedia.ca/">Village Media</a></em> — are shaping what it means to be a journalist and what journalism could and should do in this country. They have taken advantage of low barriers to entry online and the potential of a digital space that affords a place to experiment with diverse approaches. </p>
<p>Yet the decline of legacy, commercial media has been a singular focus of policymakers and journalism coverage even as these new digital-born journalism organizations are winning recognition at industry awards and filling gaps in news coverage.</p>
<h2>Tackling critical issues</h2>
<p>Our research for the past two years has focused on identifying and understanding this wave of digital-born entrants. We’ve found that the majority of the new digital news organizations are still up and running, even though many startups fail in their first few years. Like <em>The Conversation Canada</em>, more than half have launched since 2015.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Climate activists holding up a variety of signs demonstrate in downtown Calgary" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/470671/original/file-20220623-52182-2w9vtx.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/470671/original/file-20220623-52182-2w9vtx.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470671/original/file-20220623-52182-2w9vtx.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470671/original/file-20220623-52182-2w9vtx.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470671/original/file-20220623-52182-2w9vtx.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470671/original/file-20220623-52182-2w9vtx.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470671/original/file-20220623-52182-2w9vtx.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Some of the new digital news organizations in Canada have focused coverage on specific issues like the climate crisis.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jeff McIntosh</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>A majority of the new journalism organizations are located in British Columbia and Ontario, although they are largely in non-urban centres. Some 40 per cent have a national and/or international outlook in their coverage, which is a surprise given the fears about the loss of local news.</p>
<p>Many of these new organizations are consciously mission-driven, with some acknowledging their roles as a response to urgent global concerns and living in a settler-colonial nation state. Some take explicit stances on harms and fault lines in legacy media reporting including justice for Indigenous peoples, racial injustice, the climate crisis, the economy and more.</p>
<p>Just under two-thirds of the new digital-born news media were started by a mix of veteran and emerging journalists, and the rest by media makers, business people or activists. </p>
<p>This new system is, however, not without its challenges such as sustainability, scale, living wages, attracting audiences and the influence of funders, to name just a few. </p>
<p>The increase in the past two decades in the number and range of journalism entrepreneurs and owners is important because there is evidence the concentration of ownership has contributed to a limited diversity of perspectives and types of organizations that could and have engaged in journalism in Canada. </p>
<h2>Trend towards not-for-profits</h2>
<p>Our research shows a shift to not-for-profit organizations doing journalism in the past two decades, including <em>The Conversation Canada</em>. </p>
<p>The evolution in types of ownership and business models is significant given the highly concentrated nature of Canadian journalism ownership, which has been a concern since the first government committee <a href="https://publications.gc.ca/Pilot/LoPBdP/BP/prb9935-e.htm#A.%20The%20Daveytxt">explored the issue in 1970</a>. </p>
<p>Contemporary Canadian journalism has also had a largely commercial orientation, despite the important presence of a public service broadcaster, with <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/comparing-media-systems/B7A12371782B7A1D62BA1A72C1395E43">professional ideals of objectivity and independence</a>.</p>
<p>These elements have contributed to a widely shared and relatively homogenous perception of journalistic roles among public and legacy media. Largely, described as “<a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/canadian-journal-of-political-science-revue-canadienne-de-science-politique/article/abs/is-there-a-distinct-quebec-media-subsystem-in-canada-evidence-of-ideological-and-political-orientations-among-canadian-news-media-organizations/835FC4D4BDAAF96976B53F28D0A05619">monitorial</a>,” journalism roles in Canada have focused on a five-point “<a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/canadian-journal-of-political-science-revue-canadienne-de-science-politique/article/abs/changes-in-canadian-journalists-views-about-the-social-and-political-roles-of-the-news-media-a-panel-study-19962003/535827D9F0BF053D9BA3D17A59E50FC3">creed</a>”: “accurately reporting the views of public figures, getting information to the public quickly, giving ordinary people a chance to express their views, investigating activities of government and public institutions, and providing analysis and interpretation of complex problems.”</p>
<h2>‘A single newspaper agenda’</h2>
<p>Such professional commercial logics span Canada’s anglophone and francophone media systems. A recent study by scholars in Québec found the perception of similar content focus in Canadian media. These scholars suggest this finding validates prior research that there is “<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20210428185800id_/https:/www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/835FC4D4BDAAF96976B53F28D0A05619/S0008423920000189a.pdf/div-class-title-is-there-a-distinct-quebec-media-subsystem-in-canada-evidence-of-ideological-and-political-orientations-among-canadian-news-media-organizations-div.pdf">a single newspaper agenda in Canada</a>,” with the caveat that this agenda is “beyond Québec-specific issues.” </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="People walk by two newspaper boxes in downtown Toronto" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/470457/original/file-20220623-51459-5mozlo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/470457/original/file-20220623-51459-5mozlo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470457/original/file-20220623-51459-5mozlo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470457/original/file-20220623-51459-5mozlo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470457/original/file-20220623-51459-5mozlo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470457/original/file-20220623-51459-5mozlo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470457/original/file-20220623-51459-5mozlo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">As legacy newsrooms in Canada have struggled and downsized, a new crop of digital-born organizations have launched across the country.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Kevin Frayer</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>These are important considerations because there is evidence the relationship between journalists’ professional ideology in Canada and perception of partisanship and politicization is paradoxical. While journalists ascribe to neutrality, audiences perceive them as partisan.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/canadians-trust-in-the-news-media-hits-a-new-low-184302">Canadians' trust in the news media hits a new low</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This paradox is timely as it coincides with a <a href="https://www.cem.ulaval.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/dnr22_can_eng.pdf">decline in public trust</a> in the news media. Anglophones’ trust in journalism has dropped to a low of 39 per cent compared to 55 per cent in 2016 and to 47 per cent from 55 per cent over the same period among francophones.</p>
<p>Perceptions of trust are related to “<a href="https://theconversation.com/canadians-trust-in-the-news-media-hits-a-new-low-184302">perceived lack of diversity in media ownership</a>”, as well as concerns about the media’s independence from political or business influence.</p>
<h2>What journalism can be</h2>
<p>The fifth anniversary of <em>The Conversation Canada</em> is an opportunity to express our deep gratitude to the many individuals, including its editors, who have contributed to its success — and to its <a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781003140399-6/university-giant-newsroom-alfred-hermida-lisa-varano-mary-lynn-young">meaningful contributions to journalism in Canada</a>, from the coverage of <a href="https://theconversation.com/ca/topics/covid-19-82431">COVID-19</a> to the podcast <em><a href="https://dont-call-me-resilient.simplecast.com/">Don’t Call Me Resilient</a></em>. </p>
<p>Our goal in co-founding <em>The Conversation Canada</em> was to explore how non-commercial journalism values affect what journalism could and should do in this country. (We are both tenured professors at the University of British Columbia and we have not earned any revenue from <em>The Conversation Canada</em> or our roles in it.)</p>
<p>It was an initiative to see what journalism could be if written by experts in their fields and edited by journalists, deliberately welcoming those critical studies and perspectives from scholars who have been excluded and/or had to operate on the margins of the media. </p>
<p>Our approach sought to address established power relations in journalism, extending how the newsroom and its presence within a commercial landscape, <a href="https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/oso/9780190067076.001.0001/oso-9780190067076">largely created by white professional journalists</a> in Canada, has been habitually conceptualized, understood and practised. </p>
<p>Canada is not alone in trying to decide on policy responses to legacy journalism economic challenges while seeing the rise of newer players all trying to survive alongside the dominance of platforms such as Facebook and Google. Countries such as Australia, Belgium and others are grappling with how best to support quality journalism today to various degrees of success.</p>
<p>Our research is ongoing as part of <a href="https://journalisminnovation.ca/about">a number of related studies</a> in Canada and Australia about the impact and use of <em>The Conversation</em> content nationally and globally, funded by a Canadian federal government research grant. </p>
<p>The evidence is clear that national social, economic and political conditions have an impact on the nature of our media systems. The question for Canadians is what choices they have or should have about the kinds of journalism that are available to them, now and in the future.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/185541/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mary Lynn Young receives funding from the Social Science and Humanities Research Council. She is co-founder and a former member of the board of The Conversation Canada.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alfred Hermida receives funding from the Social Science and Humanities Research Council. He is co-founder and a member of the board of directors of The Conversation Canada.</span></em></p>Canada is home to a growing number of new digital-born journalism organizations, even though government policy aimed at helping the news industry has focused mostly on the decline of legacy media.Mary Lynn Young, Professor, School of Journalism, Writing and Media, University of British ColumbiaAlfred Hermida, Professor, School of Journalism, Writing, and Media, University of British ColumbiaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1583522021-09-12T13:09:43Z2021-09-12T13:09:43ZIn times of racial injustice, university education should not be ‘neutral’<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/418123/original/file-20210826-15869-34xvo2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=93%2C147%2C5083%2C3220&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">While Canadian universities are paying more attention to anti-racism and equity, more must be done to incorporate those values into the education students receive.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Over the last year, public events have drawn attention to the persistent reality of systemic <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-anti-black-racism-on-canadian-university-campuses-robs-us-all-140927">racism</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/beyond-name-changes-and-pulling-down-statues-how-to-decolonise-business-schools-142394">colonialism</a> across North America. </p>
<p>Universities in Canada are paying <a href="https://www.particlesforjustice.org/">increased attention</a> to questions of Indigenization, anti-racism, equity and inclusion. Many <a href="https://theconversation.com/beware-of-bias-training-addressing-systemic-racism-is-not-an-easy-fix-142587">initiatives</a> are focused on <a href="https://academicmatters.ca/combatting-anti-blackness-at-canadian-universities-means-improving-black-representation/">representation</a> and on policies and procedures. These efforts are necessary. </p>
<p>At the same time, universities can do more. We can start to view education as an opportunity and obligation to empower students who graduate with the capacities needed to contribute to an equitable world.</p>
<p>Asserting that university education can <a href="https://www.aaihs.org/race-and-racism-at-canadian-universities/">address questions of equity</a> rests on a central assumption: that all education is consequential, and bears on how students imagine themselves in the world. Some university educators might claim that universities cannot and should not indicate a preference or leaning toward certain values or political positions. However, we see education as part of a much <a href="https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=2021021009322947">broader framework</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/417473/original/file-20210823-21-d258vx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Four people have a discussion while siting around a table." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/417473/original/file-20210823-21-d258vx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/417473/original/file-20210823-21-d258vx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/417473/original/file-20210823-21-d258vx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/417473/original/file-20210823-21-d258vx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/417473/original/file-20210823-21-d258vx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/417473/original/file-20210823-21-d258vx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/417473/original/file-20210823-21-d258vx.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Universities can play an important role in helping students develop their abilities to contribute meaningfully to a more equitable and just world.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In teaching a course, instructors make a range of judgments: what course material to teach, whether or not to link course material to social practices and how to position students in relation to the world around them. </p>
<p>Through these decisions, faculty members communicate to students what material is worth learning, its relationship to public concerns and the student’s connection to the world beyond themselves. Faculty members do not choose to “opt into” these concerns. All teaching <a href="https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/feb/7/critical-race-theory-1619-project-targeted-georgia/">informs what students see as important</a>, and how they understand themselves as part of the social fabric, with various obligations and commitments.</p>
<p>Four additional assumptions are critical to this understanding of higher education. First, <a href="https://utorontopress.com/9780802096708/longing-for-justice/">we are always ethically implicated</a>.</p>
<p>Our choices matter. In the context of systemic racism and colonialism and other forms of inequity, our choices can in some cases reinforce the status quo, in other cases resist the status quo — and at times do both. Second, as recent events have underscored, <a href="https://inequality.org/facts/global-inequality/">inequity and injustice exist</a>. We live in a world and <a href="https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2018/12/10/breaking-down-the-disturbing-data-in-toronto-police-racial-profiling-report.html">in a country </a>in which <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/health-indigenous-racism-miller-1.5764659">systemic discrimination</a> is both widespread and deep-seated. </p>
<p>Third, power matters. Access to resources and decision-making bears on how communities reap benefits or experience harm. Lastly, particularly in North America, there is an aspirational societal commitment to the public good and to justice. Many commentators, social movements and political leaders are pointing to the urgent importance of equity and reducing systemic discrimination now. Together these calls articulate broad aspirations for realizing societal commitments to the public good and to justice.</p>
<p>Universities provide an environment in which to work together at imagining, and engaging, the world in which we want to live. Students and instructors not only cover “course content,” or the central conceptual underpinnings of various disciplines. University education <a href="https://www.timeshighereducation.com/hub/p/should-universities-be-force-social-good">imparts possibilities</a> for how graduates orient themselves to the world around them, how we might live as “associated individuals.” </p>
<p>For example, engineering students may learn how to apply knowledge about engineering to improve roads in particular communities. Students in health disciplines may learn how to use their education to ensure equal access to care. People studying law may have the opportunity to learn how to use their degree to contribute to a criminal justice system that does not protect one community while doing violence to another. Conversely, students in any of these scenarios could be educated in ways that lead them to very different choices. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/417469/original/file-20210823-23-9fasq5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A group of people working together at a desk." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/417469/original/file-20210823-23-9fasq5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/417469/original/file-20210823-23-9fasq5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/417469/original/file-20210823-23-9fasq5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/417469/original/file-20210823-23-9fasq5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/417469/original/file-20210823-23-9fasq5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/417469/original/file-20210823-23-9fasq5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/417469/original/file-20210823-23-9fasq5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Universities provide space to work together and imagine the world in which we want to live.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In a world in which injustice and inequity are commonplace, universities can play a much more proactive role in addressing systemic forms of discrimination, and in <a href="https://www.qs.com/universities-encourage-social-responsibility/">contributing to a world where all students will want to live</a>. </p>
<p>Some educators hold onto the idea that the classroom ought to be “neutral,” or wholly detached from public life, and robustly deny the proposition that university education shapes how students think and act. </p>
<p>We reject this idea. Not only is it <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/09502380601162514">impossible to avoid the ways in which education shapes students’ understanding</a> of public life, it is also a significant missed opportunity.</p>
<p>Universities are places to work at a different world, to grapple with questions of what it means to live well, together. Knowledge acts <a href="https://fernwoodpublishing.ca/book/africentric-social-work">in the world and has consequences for how people live</a>. </p>
<p>We support the work across universities in North America that is attending to discriminatory policies and procedures. Alongside these efforts, we ask more of universities and of ourselves and our colleagues. Universities in Canada are public institutions. To best serve the public, faculty and administration will do well to identify and integrate the capacities students will need to contribute to justice and equity in public life.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/158352/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Between 2012 and 2015, Jennifer Simpson received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and from the Canadian Foundation for Innovation for research related to racism and colonialism.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Verna St Denis receives funding from the Sterling McDowell Foundation, Saskatchewan Teachers' Federation, 2021 to present and between 2012 and 2015 funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sulaimon Giwa does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Universities can ensure students in all disciplines are learning how to contribute to a world that they and future generations want to live in.Jennifer S Simpson, Provost and Vice-President, Academic, Toronto Metropolitan UniversitySulaimon Giwa, Assistant Professor and Associate Dean of Undergraduate Programs, Memorial University of NewfoundlandVerna St Denis, Professor, Educational Foundations, University of SaskatchewanLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1615522021-06-08T12:50:35Z2021-06-08T12:50:35ZEmily Wilder and journalism’s longstanding Achilles’ heel – partisans who cry bias<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/404548/original/file-20210604-27-vxv7ba.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=410%2C605%2C3426%2C2383&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Chicago Mayor Richard Daley – shown yelling – cried bias in the media's coverage of the 1968 Democratic National Convention.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2012647951/">Library of Congress</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>When the Associated Press fired Emily Wilder for violating its social media policy, it caused a firestorm in the media industry. <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/2021/05/20/emily-wilder-associated-press-palestine/">Critics noted</a> that the firing came only days after GOP activists called her biased, re-animating <a href="https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/emily_wilder_ap_israel_objectivity.php">an ongoing debate</a> about how responsible news organizations should deal with such accusations.</p>
<p>Wilder’s alleged violations had nothing to do with her reporting. As a student at Stanford, she had been sympathetic to the Palestinian peace movement. After being hired by the AP, she also questioned, <a href="https://twitter.com/vv1lder/status/1394073763289829378">in a tweet</a>, how the media framed its coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This was enough to feed a right-wing social media frenzy that eventually led to a story in the conservative Washington Free Beacon containing the claim, “<a href="https://freebeacon.com/media/ap-hires-anti-israel-activist-as-news-associate/">AP’s objectivity in question</a>.” </p>
<p>Without pointing to anything in her work, management, within days of partisan attackers going after her, fired her <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/25/how-ap-wronged-emily-wilder/">to protect the AP from the appearance of bias</a>, and told Wilder in its dismissal letter that the campaign against her <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/06/01/ap-editor-digs-emily-wilders-clear-bias/">prompted a probe of her social media conduct</a>. </p>
<p>The AP has acknowledged that <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/06/01/ap-editor-digs-emily-wilders-clear-bias/">“mistakes of process” were made in the way they handled the situation</a> but despite that, the outcome would have been the same.</p>
<p>Regardless of how the decision was made, this isn’t the first time that a news organization has validated the smear campaign of a special interest group by giving them exactly what they wanted.</p>
<p>For half a century, crying bias has been a strategic communication tactic used against newspapers and broadcasters who strive to adhere to professional norms of dispassionate objectivity. It’s like kryptonite for responsible news organizations: the stronger their piety to journalistic ethics and the ideal of objectivity, the more vulnerable they are to accusations made in bad faith.</p>
<h2>The emergence of journalistic norms</h2>
<p>In broad strokes, the idea of journalistic objectivity <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600600629737">dates back to the mid-19th century</a>, a time when most newspapers were decidedly partisan. </p>
<p>That’s when terms like “neutrality” and “objectivity” started to appear <a href="https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327728JMME1601_3">in textbooks for students learning the trade</a>, alongside ideals deemed crucial to a democratic press: verifying facts, being a watchdog and holding the powerful accountable.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/403648/original/file-20210531-24-k47pji.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/403648/original/file-20210531-24-k47pji.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/403648/original/file-20210531-24-k47pji.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=840&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/403648/original/file-20210531-24-k47pji.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=840&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/403648/original/file-20210531-24-k47pji.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=840&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/403648/original/file-20210531-24-k47pji.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1056&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/403648/original/file-20210531-24-k47pji.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1056&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/403648/original/file-20210531-24-k47pji.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1056&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">An 1896 ad for The New York Times reads, in Latin, ‘The truth is great and will prevail.’</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Interestingly, many scholars have linked the emergence of a neutral, objective news style to the rise of the AP after the Civil War.</p>
<p>Because the AP operated then and operates now as a service that gathers and distributes its stories widely to newspapers and readers with a variety of political allegiances, there was a market imperative for the <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=Je1rnnnfI3kC&lpg=PA128&ots=jZZrM77L5P&dq=THE%20COMMUNICATIONS%20REVOLUTION%20AND%20THE%20PROFESSIONAL%20COMMUNICATOR&pg=PA137#v=onepage&q&f=false">journalists to make their reporting acceptable to all</a>. </p>
<p>Other scholars <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Just_the_Facts/BhgVCgAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1">say The New York Times</a> embraced an objective style that prioritized neutral information over storytelling to distinguish its news product from the sensationalist “<a href="https://publicdomainreview.org/collection/yellow-journalism-the-fake-news-of-the-19th-century">Yellow Journalism</a>” pushed out by media mogul William Randolph Hearst.</p>
<h2>The ‘Truth Trust’ beats back attacks</h2>
<p>It wouldn’t be long before other outlets would try to knock the AP and the Times off their mantle of objectivity.</p>
<p>During the Progressive Era, <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/muckraker">muckrakers</a>, who were reform-minded journalists, tried to counter the dominance of the AP and The New York Times by crying bias against both outlets for favoring the interests of the powerful against those of the public.</p>
<p>In 1913, Max Eastman, editor of the socialist magazine <a href="https://dlib.nyu.edu/themasses/">The Masses</a>, called the AP a “Truth Trust” and <a href="https://hdl.handle.net/2027/osu.32435055085245?urlappend=%3Bseq=542">accused it of bias against labor</a> in its reporting on mining strikes in West Virginia and Colorado. The AP responded to this allegation by using its political leverage to have Eastman charged with <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=5kU_DwAAQBAJ&lpg=PA107&ots=K9qaR-PnwO&dq=max%20eastman%20and%20the%20associated%20press&pg=PA107#v=onepage&q&f=false">criminal libel</a>. </p>
<p>Upton Sinclair, in his scathing attack on mainstream journalism, “<a href="https://www.press.uillinois.edu/books/catalog/85cxd8gy9780252028052.html">The Brass Check</a>,” details how the district attorney justified the indictment. Because Eastman had accused the AP of intentionally suppressing and concealing facts to readers of its 894 newspapers, he had thus impugned the AP’s objectivity – and, in doing so, satisfied the elements for a charge of criminal libel. </p>
<p>Journalism historian Michael Schudson argues that most mainstream media outlets adopted the AP and The New York Times’ style of objective reporting after World War I. Exhausted and demoralized by <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-woodrow-wilsons-propaganda-machine-changed-american-journalism-76270">the amount of propaganda churned out at home and abroad</a> during the war, newspapers <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Discovering_The_News/uLois7_nNMgC?hl=en&gbpv=0">turned to reinforcing professional ethics</a>. That’s when they adopted a dispassionate writing style and started labeling opinion as a different type of writing located on a special page. </p>
<h2>Regulating the airwaves</h2>
<p>When news moved beyond the printed page to radio in the 1930s, the newly created Federal Communications Commission took its cues from Progressive Era reformers and affirmed that unbiased objectivity was the best way to serve democracy. </p>
<p>“The public interest can never be served by a dedication” to a broadcaster’s “own partisan ends,” <a href="https://repository.upenn.edu/asc_papers/745/">the commission argued</a>. Democracy depended on “fairly and objectively presented” news. </p>
<p>Later, the FCC instituted the <a href="https://repository.upenn.edu/asc_papers/745/">Fairness Doctrine</a>, which called for broadcasters to present “all sides of important public questions, fairly, objectively and without bias.” As television emerged as the dominant medium for consuming the news, the Fairness Doctrine obliged broadcasters to remain neutral in their reporting. </p>
<p>In addition to FCC regulation, there were strong market imperatives for television news divisions to report in a dispassionate objective style. Mainstream broadcasters had to appeal to the widest possible range of opinion so as to attract advertisers. The best way to avoid what media critics Noam Chomsky and Ed Herman <a href="https://chomsky.info/consent01/">called “flak” from advertisers</a> was to present the news without taking a position on it. </p>
<h2>The powerful weaponize charges of bias</h2>
<p>But while good faith muckrakers cried bias in the name of protecting the public from those with the most power, powerful special interests soon found it worked for them, too.</p>
<p>After the 1968 Democratic convention, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley showed the effectiveness of crying bias as a way to manipulate the media and neutralize the value of public interest journalism. </p>
<p>Networks had been critical of the Chicago police department’s violent response to protests. Yet Daley <a href="https://niemanreports.org/articles/1968-was-a-moment-when-the-idea-of-liberal-media-bias-got-nationalized/">demanded free airtime to respond</a> to what he called “biased coverage.” </p>
<p>Mostly, he got what he wanted: Broadcasters bent over backwards to prove they were unbiased, and Daley got time on TV to frame protesters as the villains.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/404312/original/file-20210603-13-jwegg4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Vice President Spiro Agnew Agnew seated in a suit." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/404312/original/file-20210603-13-jwegg4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/404312/original/file-20210603-13-jwegg4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=748&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/404312/original/file-20210603-13-jwegg4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=748&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/404312/original/file-20210603-13-jwegg4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=748&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/404312/original/file-20210603-13-jwegg4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=940&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/404312/original/file-20210603-13-jwegg4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=940&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/404312/original/file-20210603-13-jwegg4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=940&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Vice President Spiro Agnew denounced critics of the Vietnam War as biased political actors.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/color-portrait-of-spiro-agnew-governor-of-maryland-and-vice-news-photo/83930955?adppopup=true">Bachrach/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Daley demonstrated that news organizations who took their craft seriously would overcompensate if accused of “liberal bias.” The strategy was quickly weaponized, deployed by politicians like Spiro Agnew, who denounced journalists critical of the Vietnam War as “<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/retropolis/wp/2018/08/08/nattering-nabobs-of-negativism-the-improbable-rise-of-spiro-t-agnew/">nattering nabobs of negativism</a>.” </p>
<p>For partisans with no investment in neutral objectivity, crying bias became a way to, as journalist and historian Eric Alterman describes it, “<a href="https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/what-liberal-media/">work the ref</a>.” </p>
<p>By the mid-1980s, Ronald Reagan’s <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/02/04/fairness-doctrine-wont-solve-our-problems-it-can-foster-needed-debate/">pro-corporate FCC had gutted the Fairness Doctrine</a> and any requirement that media serve the public interest. By prioritizing commercial broadcasters’ rights to free speech over the public’s right to have accurate news, the move unleashed a market for infotainment that cashed in on audiences more entertained by angry jeremiads than ethical journalism. </p>
<p>Trailblazing shock jocks like Rush Limbaugh built their brands <a href="https://www.poynter.org/reporting-editing/2021/how-rush-limbaughs-rise-after-the-gutting-of-the-fairness-doctrine-led-to-todays-highly-partisan-media/">railing against boring mainstream news anchors</a>. The entertainers who followed his lead masked their ambitions and own opinions by accusing reporters with piety to public interest journalism of having liberal bias.</p>
<p>Since then, many mainstream networks have gone out of their way to appear to be giving <a href="https://pressthink.org/2014/08/when-quoting-both-sides-and-leaving-it-there-is-the-riskier-call/">“both sides” a chance to speak</a>. In some cases, this approach is admirable – an in-house continuation of the policies promoted by the Fairness Doctrine. But it can easily slide into legitimizing bad faith communication, and it’s <a href="http://archives.cjr.org/essay/the_danger_of_fair_and_balance.php">been disastrous in the coverage of important issues like climate change</a>.</p>
<p>[<em>Like what you’ve read? Want more?</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=likethis">Sign up for The Conversation’s daily newsletter</a>.]</p>
<h2>The future of a democratic press</h2>
<p>Today, crying bias is the go-to tactic for neutralizing critical reporting and eroding trust in competitors. A search on Fox News’ platform produces <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/search-results/search?q=bias">over 18,000 articles and videos about media bias</a>. </p>
<p>Though right-wing media outlets and personalities appear to use the tactic the most, they certainly aren’t the only special interests doing so. </p>
<p>Back in 2001, New York Times reporter Barry Meier wrote 13 stories revealing Purdue Pharma’s questionable marketing of OxyContin. Purdue cried bias, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/21/weekinreview/the-public-editor-you-can-stand-on-principle-and-still-stub-a-toe.html">calling the reporting</a> “sensationalized and skewed,” while arguing that since Meier had published a book on OxyContin, there was a conflict of interest. Though the Times stood by the reporting, editors moved Meier off the story to avoid the appearance of bias. Twenty years and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/24/us/politics/purdue-pharma-opioids-guilty-settlement.html">a guilty plea</a> later, we know that Meier reported the truth. Yet the charge of bias put The New York Times on the defensive. </p>
<p>So what’s to be done when political actors cry bias in bad faith? </p>
<p>One solution could be to offer more protection to journalists who are the target of smear campaigns, as some of the AP’s reporters argued <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/19srByafx4z79bMRm4buo5u7Fm1bj5EShTkj1gdGUzTg/view">the organization should have done in the case of Emily Wilder</a>.</p>
<p>Instead, management seems to have done what scholar Jay Rosen <a href="https://pressthink.org/2020/11/the-coming-confrontation-between-the-american-press-and-the-republican-party">has criticized NPR and other mainstream journalists news outlets</a> of doing: taken refuge to protect themselves from criticism instead of seeking truth to serve the public interest.</p>
<p>Democracy’s survival depends on journalists boldly doing the latter no matter how loud special interests complain. For when news organizations worry more about protecting their brand than their dedication to truth, their bad faith foes get what they want.</p>
<p><em>The AP and The Conversation US are media partners and The Conversation also oversees two grants to the AP on religion and philanthropy.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/161552/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matthew Jordan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The accusation of bias is like kryptonite for responsible news organizations: the stronger their piety to the ideal of objectivity, the more vulnerable they are to complaints made in bad faith.Matthew Jordan, Associate Professor of Media Studies, Penn StateLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1604922021-05-24T12:09:02Z2021-05-24T12:09:02ZWhy do I need anything other than Google to answer a question?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/400406/original/file-20210512-15-2qezsd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C4043%2C1997&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Scholars can be more reliable than search engines.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/silhouettes-of-people-holding-laptops-are-seen-in-front-of-news-photo/1026614170">Anadolu Agency/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/281719/original/file-20190628-76743-26slbc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/281719/original/file-20190628-76743-26slbc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=293&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281719/original/file-20190628-76743-26slbc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=293&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281719/original/file-20190628-76743-26slbc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=293&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281719/original/file-20190628-76743-26slbc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=368&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281719/original/file-20190628-76743-26slbc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=368&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281719/original/file-20190628-76743-26slbc.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=368&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/curious-kids-us-74795">Curious Kids</a> is a series for children of all ages. If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, send it to <a href="mailto:curiouskidsus@theconversation.com">curiouskidsus@theconversation.com</a>.</em></p>
<hr>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Why do I need a scholar to answer a question if there is Google? – Harrison F., age 13, Brookline, Massachusetts</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>Imagine you’re researching something. Whether you’re a fourth grader who needs to find out how volcanoes erupt or you’re an adult looking for more information regarding a news article, you might want to quickly look something up on the internet. What could go wrong?</p>
<p>Google’s search engine may seem to have all the answers to your questions. But where does that information come from? Who selects the websites that display when you enter “volcanic eruption” in the search box? Who decides which item shows up first and in what order the rest will follow?</p>
<p>I think about these questions a lot because of what I do for a living: helping University of Memphis scholars <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=dFsRzLUAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">communicate about their work</a> with academic peers and the public. </p>
<p>These scholars are experts who have worked and studied for a long time to learn all they can about a topic. They answer questions by combining their knowledge with the <a href="https://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/science-fair/steps-of-the-scientific-method">scientific method</a> to discover new things. </p>
<h2>Page, Brin and PageRank</h2>
<p>When <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/4/20994361/google-alphabet-larry-page-sergey-brin-sundar-pichai-co-founders-ceo-timeline">Larry Page and Sergey Brin</a> created Google’s search engine in 1996 as Stanford University computer science students, they were trying to establish a fast way to easily find things on the internet. At the time, <a href="https://www.iflscience.com/technology/this-website-simulates-the-pain-of-loading-the-internet-in-the-90s/">searching through the web was slow and difficult</a>, making it hard to find the best information.</p>
<p>They invented an algorithm, a detailed step-by-step instruction set or formula, called <a href="https://searchengineland.com/what-is-google-pagerank-a-guide-for-searchers-webmasters-11068">PageRank</a>. It works by estimating the quality of a webpage by measuring the number and quality of other pages that link to it. When you search on Google, its search engine returns the highest ranked pages related to what you’re looking for. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/IKXvSKaI2Ko?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">PageRank, explained.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Some drawbacks</h2>
<p>Googling became so fast it can seem instantaneous.</p>
<p>But the results you see when you do a Google search can be influenced by other things besides PageRank, including whether <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-017-0021-4">advertisers are paying Google</a> to make their websites show up higher than they otherwise might. <a href="https://theconversation.com/its-not-just-a-social-media-problem-how-search-engines-spread-misinformation-152155">Google’s algorithms</a> factor in hundreds of other variables, including what sites you’ve clicked on in the past and how recently a page was updated.</p>
<p>Unlike scholars, Google’s search engine can’t automatically decide which sources are the most important, most accurate or most significant. That is, Google searches don’t necessarily identify <a href="https://theconversation.com/its-not-just-a-social-media-problem-how-search-engines-spread-misinformation-152155">objective and reliable</a> information.</p>
<p>You may consider switching to another search engine like Microsoft’s Bing or one that specifically promotes the privacy of your information like DuckDuckGo. But many of these alternatives have the same shortcomings. </p>
<h2>How scholars communicate</h2>
<p>Scholars often communicate by publishing research papers. Each paper emphasizes a single idea that adds something to a discussion. It may be the new result from an experiment or a new observation. Other scholars then read that paper and discuss it.</p>
<p>Knowledgeable people can take stock of the same set of facts and still have different perspectives, which means there isn’t necessarily one right answer to a question. Over time this back and forth leads to some generally accepted principles and concepts.</p>
<p>This cycle of research, review and discussion has been <a href="https://www.historyofinformation.com/detail.php?entryid=2661">around since the first</a> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2014.0380">academic journals were published in 1665</a>. As new discoveries are made, ideas can change.</p>
<p>One way researchers show what other ideas they consider in their work is through scholarly citations. You’ve surely seen them before – they are in the reference section at the back of nonfiction books or at the bottom of Wikipedia articles. Each points to another work.</p>
<p>These citations tell you what other books and sources the author of what you’re reading considered – and how they came to form the ideas. If multiple scholars <a href="https://doi.org/10.1023/b:scie.0000027310.68393.bc">use the same ideas as building blocks</a> for their own concepts, and then their ideas, in turn, are used as building blocks for other ideas, it continually leads to a cycle of innovation. </p>
<p>This discovery process isn’t influenced by advertisers – even if it can be partially shaped by whether or not scholars <a href="https://theconversation.com/when-big-companies-fund-academic-research-the-truth-often-comes-last-119164">can get funding</a> to pursue a particular kind of research. </p>
<p>Many of the ideas you find on the internet originate from scholarship but are vulnerable to bias and advertising pressure in a way most scholars are not. We need scholars because they provide a complete picture, the most up-to-date information, derived from their wisdom and deeply considered perspective.</p>
<p>The internet makes locating information easier than at any other point in human history. But as <a href="https://www.relicsworld.com/albert-einstein/information-is-not-knowledge-the-only-source-of-knowledge-is-experience-you-author-albert-einstein">Albert Einstein</a> said, “Information is not knowledge. The only source of knowledge is experience.”</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Hello, curious kids! Do you have a question you’d like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to <a href="mailto:curiouskidsus@theconversation.com">CuriousKidsUS@theconversation.com</a>. Please tell us your name, age and the city where you live.</em></p>
<p><em>And since curiosity has no age limit – adults, let us know what you’re wondering, too. We won’t be able to answer every question, but we will do our best.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/160492/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Cody Behles does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Unlike scholars, Google’s search engine can’t automatically decide which sources are the most important, most accurate or most significant.Cody Behles, Director of Innovation & Research Support, University of MemphisLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1587772021-04-18T12:51:49Z2021-04-18T12:51:49ZSkepticism, not objectivity, is what makes journalism matter<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/394869/original/file-20210413-17-1yqxgc2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=15%2C0%2C5263%2C3355&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Washington Post has been criticized for saying a reporter who was the victim of a sexual assault couldn't objectively cover topics like the #MeToo movement.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>“That reporter is too biased to cover this story.” It’s a too-familiar complaint from news consumers — and sometimes also from newsroom managers — because people expect journalists to be impartial, detached or even “objective.”</p>
<p>The fraught idea of journalistic objectivity was at the centre of a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/30/washington-post-felicia-sonmez-sexual-assault-sexism">recent controversy at the <em>Washington Post</em></a>.</p>
<p>The story of <em>Post</em> politics reporter Felicia Sonmez began with her 2018 allegation of sexual assault against a fellow journalist. Soon, she’d been banned from covering stories that “hinged on sexual misconduct” and, by extension, the #MeToo movement — <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/media/washington-post-reverses-prohibition-on-reporter-from-writing-about-sexual-assault/2021/03/29/c0ee3be0-90c5-11eb-9668-89be11273c09_story.html">a ban finally lifted on March 29</a>.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1376612086512553989"}"></div></p>
<p>Similar perceptions of “bias” have stymied Canadian journalists in <a href="https://j-source.ca/article/how-do-you-know-if-youre-too-close-to-your-source/">relationships</a> with politicians, <a href="https://www.nlgja.org/blog/2011/02/chick-fil-a-and-nlgja-can-a-lesbian-be-objective-about-chick-fil-as-problems/">gay reporters</a> covering marriage reform and <a href="https://archives.cjr.org/feature/the_times_and_the_jews.php">Jewish</a> or <a href="https://readpassage.com/uncovering-canadian-medias-devastating-pro-israel-bias/">Muslim</a> reporters in the Middle East. </p>
<p>Journalists, apparently, should not report from territory to which they’ve spent their lives acclimating — unless you count education, health care, war, sports, travel, cars or real estate.</p>
<h2>The O-word</h2>
<p>Racialized reporters, for instance, often get hit with the word “objective” when they pitch or file stories about race. </p>
<p>“Our professionalism is questioned when we report on the communities we’re from, and the spectre of advocacy follows us in a way that it does not follow many of our white colleagues,” <a href="https://thewalrus.ca/objectivity-is-a-privilege-afforded-to-white-journalists/">Pacinthe Mattar</a> recently wrote in <em>The Walrus</em>.</p>
<p>Mattar quoted a news producer as saying: “There seems to be the assumption that racialized journalists cannot co-exist with the journalistic standards of being fair and balanced and impartial. Really, what we are fighting for, what we’ve always been fighting for, is just the truth.”</p>
<p>And that’s the problem: does telling the truth require journalists to detach themselves from their life experiences? Is this degree of balance or impartiality even possible? </p>
<p>As far as I can tell, few professors use the O-word nowadays in Canadian journalism schools. Journalists inevitably bring their subjective experiences to work and must learn to recognize and manage their biases and assumptions. They are human beings — they have feelings about the events and people that they find interesting. </p>
<h2>A resilient ideal</h2>
<p>Still, the <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781118841570.iejs0091">controversial</a> ideal of “objectivity” is uncannily resilient. It’s especially widely invoked in the United States — long after <a href="https://archives.cjr.org/feature/rethinking_objectivity.php">the actual word objectivity was removed</a> from that country’s professional journalists’ ethics code in 1996.</p>
<p>Clever academics have helped keep the O-word alive by massaging its meaning to suit a more limited purpose than intellectual detachment.</p>
<p><a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/146488490100200201">Columbia University’s Michael Schudson defined</a> this “chief occupational value of American journalism” as “at once a moral ideal, a set of reporting and editing practices, and an observable pattern of news writing.”</p>
<p>Likewise, Canadian ethicist Stephen Ward has promoted a method of “<a href="https://ethics.journalism.wisc.edu/2017/03/27/engagement-and-pragmatic-objectivity/">pragmatic objectivity</a>” that requires journalists to step back from their own beliefs to apply tests for empirical validity, logical coherence, “self-consciousness” and transparency.</p>
<p>And so impartiality limped stubbornly into an age of duelling truths. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/as-ottawa-helps-the-news-industry-latest-research-suggests-journalists-loyalties-are-tough-to-buy-108998">As Ottawa helps the news industry, latest research suggests journalists’ loyalties are tough to buy</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Detached watchdogs</h2>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/as-ottawa-helps-the-news-industry-latest-research-suggests-journalists-loyalties-are-tough-to-buy-108998">Research by a team I led found</a> that most Canadian journalists still see themselves as <a href="https://digital.library.ryerson.ca/islandora/object/RULA%3A8747">detached watchdogs</a> — autonomous monitors of power and privilege. And I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve heard students and working journalists say words to the effect of: “We know objectivity’s impossible, but we aim for it anyway.”</p>
<p>It’s an impossibility that now leads some to embrace outright, unabashed advocacy.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Reporters are lined up to ask questions of a politician standing at a lecturn" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/394881/original/file-20210413-17-rys6mv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/394881/original/file-20210413-17-rys6mv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/394881/original/file-20210413-17-rys6mv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/394881/original/file-20210413-17-rys6mv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/394881/original/file-20210413-17-rys6mv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/394881/original/file-20210413-17-rys6mv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/394881/original/file-20210413-17-rys6mv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">All journalists bring their biases and their own life experiences to assignments.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Chris Young</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>A new book, <a href="https://www.routledge.com/The-Roots-of-Fake-News-Objecting-to-Objective-Journalism/Winston-Winston/p/book/9780367145460"><em>The Roots of Fake News: Objecting to Objective Journalism</em></a>, by father-and-son British professors Brian and Matthew Winston, argues against the “fantasy” of a journalism that provides “pure truth.” They call for journalism to be rebuilt wholesale on a more “honest, biased, subjective foundation.”</p>
<p>That seems unnecessarily extreme. Yes, journalists’ ranks have always included commentators who unapologetically advocate for one or another form of social change (whether leftward or rightward) or for the status quo. But not all. </p>
<h2>Different motivations</h2>
<p>Newsrooms are big tents whose occupants, diverse even if only in interests and aptitudes, produce nuanced documentaries and breaking-news tweets, baseball reports and concert reviews, data-mining investigations and courthouse updates.</p>
<p>Some are in this business to make the world better. Others live to fact-check. Still others like making people laugh.</p>
<p>Writing at the century’s turn, <a href="https://www.americanpressinstitute.org/journalism-essentials/what-is-journalism/elements-journalism/">Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel</a> rejected outdated notions like objectivity and balance in favour of 10 distinguishing marks of journalism that hinge upon a “discipline of <a href="https://www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781118841570.iejs0100">verification</a>.”</p>
<p>Their book, <em>The Elements of Journalism</em>, has been required reading in journalism schools around the world for the last two decades, but mass addiction to the O-word continues.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/394882/original/file-20210413-21-1si3d98.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A picture of the book The Elements of Journalism" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/394882/original/file-20210413-21-1si3d98.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/394882/original/file-20210413-21-1si3d98.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=925&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/394882/original/file-20210413-21-1si3d98.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=925&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/394882/original/file-20210413-21-1si3d98.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=925&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/394882/original/file-20210413-21-1si3d98.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1163&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/394882/original/file-20210413-21-1si3d98.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1163&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/394882/original/file-20210413-21-1si3d98.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1163&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">This book is required reading in many journalism schools.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>If a benign replacement is needed to break the O-habit, it could be a much humbler ideal: plain, old-fashioned skepticism.</p>
<h2>Uninhibited curiosity</h2>
<p>The uninhibited questioning of what others take to be facts is nothing like a claim of neutrality or to be seeking “pure truth.” Skeptical journalists make no claim except their own ignorance and they expect to be surprised daily. When called upon to opine, interpret or analyze, they stay within sight of evidence.</p>
<p>As for a unifying purpose, they seek merely to provide (in the <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1461670X.2017.1338152">words of Oxford University’s Rasmus Kleis Neilsen</a>) “relatively accurate, accessible, relevant, and timely independently produced diverse information” about public affairs.</p>
<p>It’s neither bias nor objectivity but simple curiosity that has led journalists to ask unsettling questions like: Were soldiers dying because governments spread <a href="https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/iraq-war-media-fail-matt-taibbi-812230/">lies to justify</a> wars? Was a wildly popular newfangled <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/26889576-the-big-short">financial instrument</a> sound? Did a leading magazine skip fact-checking a <a href="https://www.cjr.org/investigation/rolling_stone_investigation.php">false allegation of campus rape</a>?</p>
<p>The tradition lives on despite dissent’s growing hazards: Is the science of <a href="https://apple.news/A8FBxu_NSReCpsf-Ah4NdJw">combating pandemics</a> more complicated than governments would have us believe? Does realistic health policy require setting a numerical limit on <a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/define-an-acceptable-level-of-covid-deaths-kfz7lm0b8">“acceptable” deaths</a>? Are Canadian lawyers <a href="https://the-advocate.ca/emag/issues/2021/March/page_10.html">debating</a> a court-enforced declaration of pronouns?</p>
<p>To ask dumb questions when all around believe they know the answers requires both mental discipline and hard-won confidence. But it’s both more reasonable and more inclusive than enforced detachment. </p>
<p>Under skepticism’s rubric, subject matter with which you’re intimately familiar is the opposite of forbidden territory; your life’s experience can provide perfect trailheads to unfamiliar paths, because you know where to look — you know what you don’t know.</p>
<p>There, in the unknown place just out of sight of home, journalists find new questions to ask and new stories to tell, stories that need telling whether or not they’re comfortable to hear.</p>
<p>Skepticism, not objectivity, is why democracies need journalists.</p>
<p><em>This is adapted from <a href="https://cfe.ryerson.ca/blog/2021/04/unwanted-questions-skepticism-not-objectivity-what-makes-journalism-matter">an article originally published</a> by the Centre for Free Expression at Ryerson University.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/158777/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ivor Shapiro's research on journalists' professional roles and practice has received funding from Ryerson University and from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). </span></em></p>The concept that journalists should be objective is outdated and impossible. Instead, good reporters use life experiences to ask fresh questions.Ivor Shapiro, Professor, School of Journalism; Senior Fellow, Centre for Free Expression, Toronto Metropolitan UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1564782021-03-08T11:56:02Z2021-03-08T11:56:02ZNo More Page 3: how a feminist collective took on a media behemoth to challenge everyday sexism<p>The daily image of a topless woman on page three of the Sun newspaper was <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/feb/07/dominic-mohan-leveson-sun-page-3">considered by some</a> to be a “British institution”. Yet it was also increasingly seen as a relic of institutionalised sexism in the media and society.</p>
<p>Then in 2015, nearly 50 years after it was first introduced, the feature was quietly removed from the publication. This decision was credited, in part, to the online campaign efforts of the “No More Page 3” (NMP3) movement, which gained the support of 140 members of parliament and numerous charities, including Women’s Aid and Girlguiding. It also attracted more than <a href="https://www.change.org/p/david-dinsmore-take-the-bare-boobs-out-of-the-sun-nomorepage3">240,000 petition signatures</a>.</p>
<p>The campaign, which helped to force change at one of the UK’s most popular and powerful media companies, was widely acclaimed, described by one MP as a “seismic victory”. Activist Katherine Sladden <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/20/sun-scrapping-page-3-topless-victory-women">wrote</a>, “No other campaign has done as much to inspire a new generation of young feminists,” adding that it “became the gateway for women finding the courage to speak out on issues they care about”.</p>
<p>But beneath this success story lies a complex tale of how emotional energy sustained the NMP3 campaigners through personal and painful trolling. </p>
<p><a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0170840621994501">Our research</a> into the campaign reveals how supporters were met with online abuse on a daily basis. They regularly encountered rape and death threats aimed at themselves and their families.</p>
<p>Campaign founder <a href="https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/110/1109964/how-to-start-a-revolution/9781473526570.html">Lucy-Anne Holmes has told</a> how she suffered an “overwhelming feeling of helplessness” and “burnout”, recalling:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It was terrifying. I was spent: financially, emotionally, creatively. Just going on Twitter with all of those voices coming at me would bring on a panic attack. I felt like I was being strangled by invisible hands.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Her experience was far from unique. For while the liberating potential of social media to mobilise collective action is widely valued, <a href="https://theconversation.com/trolling-stays-with-you-long-after-the-abuse-21905">the toxic climate</a> many experience on social media is all too familiar, and can lead to stress, anxiety and depression. </p>
<p>Yet the relentless online abuse aimed at the NMP3 campaigners – who deliberately tried to engage with their opponents through reasoned and polite posts – was tempered by messages of encouragement, both from each other and from supporters of their cause. </p>
<p>This complex interplay of positive and negative emotions led us to dig deeper into the campaigners’ survival story, and investigate the powerful techniques which kept them going in the face of such overwhelming adversity.</p>
<p>One important element was the underlying sense of solidarity which became a powerful force in helping the campaigners to recharge and replenish, sustaining momentum through emotional highs and lows. Faced with trolling and harassment, many campaigners felt energised simply by being online with other women with shared experiences. This feeling of alignment with others created a valuable store of emotional energy.</p>
<p>As one campaigner told us: “It wasn’t just a campaign … it was a space where we could go and feel completely confident, we could share anything with each other, and work out what we thought about things.” </p>
<h2>Stepping back to move forward</h2>
<p>Interestingly, this solidarity led to the coordinated and tactical use of a relay system adopted by the team. An exhausted campaigner wrestling with a hostile social media thread would “pass the baton” on to a colleague via a system of online messaging or “tagging” across platforms. </p>
<p>This system became a vital part of keeping the campaign’s momentum at times when some members felt the need to retreat from the front line. There was time and space for activists to step away from their screens, to disengage with the onslaught of social media. </p>
<p>Usually temporary, these moments of stepping away were deliberate and empowering – they offered protection. And in preserving individual wellbeing, they also ensured the continuation of the campaign.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"690623792574550017"}"></div></p>
<p>Retreating, far from being seen as a form of weakness or defeat, was supported by the campaigners. It was a strategy which allowed for recovery of emotional energy and healing and, crucially, it rejuvenated the campaigners to return to campaigning. </p>
<p>A genuine connection to the roots of the campaign was also something that sustained the (mostly female) volunteers. They drew on their aligned personal experiences, often reminiscing about teenage shame they experienced related to their bodies or of later episodes of sexual harassment. The emotions related to these experiences meant the campaigners didn’t just “think” shame or anger, they felt it deeply.</p>
<p>One explained to us: “The feminist stuff still remains the thing that really lights me up.” She continued: “I feel it’s personal, it’s maternal, because I have a daughter, and a son who’s affected by toxic masculinity. It’s in my experience of abuse in relationship. I’m angry about it and passionate about it because it’s personal to me and people that I love.” </p>
<p>Another said: “Standing up for what is right is enough to make your legs go weak, your voice grow hoarse, and your hands shake with rage.”</p>
<p>Six years on from the NMP3 victory, more action is needed to fight inequality in both our online and offline worlds – there is still plenty to campaign for. Digital platforms certainly need to better police social media channels which continue to tolerate and excuse trolling and hate speech, particularly that directed towards women.</p>
<p>But we should be encouraged by NMP3’s story of grassroots collective strength, and its journey to success. And we should also consider the lessons it provides about activism and the common advice for women to always “lean in”. Sometimes, it seems, it’s better to simply retreat, replenish and come back stronger.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/156478/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The campaign to stop newspapers publishing topless photos of women relied on a special brand of emotional energy.Sarah Glozer, Senior Lecturer in Marketing, Business & Society, University of BathLauren McCarthy, Senior Lecturer in Strategy and Sustainability, Royal Holloway University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/989602018-08-13T11:20:23Z2018-08-13T11:20:23ZIs there such a thing as an objectively ‘bad’ song?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/230900/original/file-20180807-191031-1dsvdvi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=1%2C0%2C937%2C574&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Estrada Anton via Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Everyone has a song which irritates the hell out of them – but <a href="http://ismir2005.ismir.net/proceedings/2124.pdf">Achy Breaky Heart by Billy Ray Cyrus</a> was found by one 2005 study to have been nominated most often as “the worst song ever”. The authors, academics from New Zealand and the US, listed a few reasons: awful lyrics, an overly simple melody, negative personal associations, but they also found that their respondents “wrestled – unsuccessfully – with the problem of providing a reasoned, rational analysis of a visceral response”.</p>
<p>In other words, they found it hard to put in to words just why, or how much, they hated the song.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/225029/original/file-20180626-112607-2hr8we.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/225029/original/file-20180626-112607-2hr8we.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/225029/original/file-20180626-112607-2hr8we.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/225029/original/file-20180626-112607-2hr8we.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/225029/original/file-20180626-112607-2hr8we.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/225029/original/file-20180626-112607-2hr8we.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/225029/original/file-20180626-112607-2hr8we.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Just don’t tell his heart, his achy breaky heart.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/los-angeles-jan-17-billy-ray-71311477?src=lpel79f82LcFJ3HudrRFzQ-1-2">shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>From songs and films to universities, baking and mortgages, it seems as though everything is now ranked and rated. Consumers want to know what to choose, and organisations want to know what to back. Getting the rating right is important, so can we objectively distinguish the good from the bad?</p>
<p>In some cases there is a clear, objective criterion. When two football teams play each other, the better one scores more goals. When choosing between two mortgages, the better one costs less money. Sometimes we want to know which will be better in the future. Which football team is going to win next weekend, and which mortgage will cost less in ten years? We can guess, or we can make an objective prediction based on past data. So, for example, we can usually say with some confidence that Manchester City will probably beat Southampton.</p>
<h2>The science of songs</h2>
<p>So, how about songs? There have been claims that machine learning can use data from past chart performances to predict, from its acoustic characteristics, a song’s likelihood of success. Tests have yielded mixed results. Research which has been <a href="http://doi.org/10.1080/09298215.2014.881888">successful in predicting success</a> has mostly been in limited domains. <a href="http://ismir2008.ismir.net/papers/ISMIR2008_133.pdf">A larger study</a> found machine learning methods could not distinguish what acoustic characteristics led to success.</p>
<p>This is hardly surprising. Although many hit songs have characteristics in common, there are always oddities that succeed when in theory they should not – remember <a href="https://www.thesun.co.uk/living/2974489/crazy-frog-just-turned-20-relive-his-hellish-magic-here/">Crazy Frog</a>? In the wider world of music, acoustic characteristics seem to have little impact on whether a piece classes as music at all, let alone whether or not it is successful. There is the John Cage piece, Organ²/ASLSP (As Slow as Possible), which is scheduled to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/arts-post/post/worlds-longest-concert-will-last-639-years/2011/11/21/gIQAWrdXiN_blog.html">last 639 years</a>, Gÿorgy Ligeti’s Poème Symphonique which solely constitutes <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIkLsDdeHio">sounds from ticking metronomes</a>, and an entire composition – once again from John Cage – in which <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4%E2%80%B233%E2%80%B3">no sounds are played at all</a>. All three of them regularly bring in audiences (including me).</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/k85mRPqvMbE?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>It is clearly difficult to predict musical popularity, but judging the characteristics of a song – such as mood or “danceability” – has been <a href="http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.73.8209,%20http://ismir2009.ismir.net/proceedings/PS4-8.pdf">much more successful</a>. As with most things we choose different types of music for particular purposes. The tunes that ease the morning commute may not help you get your groove on in the evening. </p>
<p>Specific characteristics of a song contribute to its effectiveness for certain uses: a clear beat around 120 beats per minute if you want to dance – or something with no sudden changes in tempo if relaxation is what you want. The most successful song ever, by number of times it has been performed, is almost certainly <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-case-against-happy-birthday-copyright-protection-45415">Happy Birthday</a> by Patty and Mildred J Hill. It is superbly suited to its sole purpose: a public and often spontaneous celebration. It is short, easy to remember and easy to sing. I doubt, however, that anyone would claim Happy Birthday was the best song ever.</p>
<h2>No accounting for taste</h2>
<p>Although objective characteristics can teach us something about how suitable a song is for a given situation, the notion of a song being “good” or “bad” in an absolute sense is much more problematic. But anyone who has ever switched off Radio 1 in disgust – or wrenched the sound system away from a friend playing just the wrong part of Madonna’s early work – has had the experience of recognising whether a song is good or bad.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/225097/original/file-20180627-112607-5ecqem.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/225097/original/file-20180627-112607-5ecqem.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/225097/original/file-20180627-112607-5ecqem.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/225097/original/file-20180627-112607-5ecqem.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/225097/original/file-20180627-112607-5ecqem.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/225097/original/file-20180627-112607-5ecqem.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/225097/original/file-20180627-112607-5ecqem.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Sometimes we’re just not in the mood.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/abstract-woman-hands-playing-music-notes-507995524?src=zTTnFiNxeFhGAVSVh4fR5Q-1-0">shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>How is it that we can be so confident in our own judgement and yet incapable of designing an objective means of explaining why? “Ultimately”, <a href="http://ismir2005.ismir.net/proceedings/2124.pdf">concluded the 2005 study</a>, “the songs that we dislike depend as much upon ourselves as upon characteristics of the songs.” The characteristics of the songs are fixed. The characteristics of the listeners can change.</p>
<p>So here is my hypothesis. Really great songs are those which transcend the purpose for which they seem intended and make a change in us. On hearing a song like Leonard Cohen’s “Hallelujah” (performed well) we become a different person, a person who loves that song. Bad songs are not those which just leave us cold and unchanged, they make us actively hate them. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/WIF4_Sm-rgQ?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>And bad songs are no use for anything except annoying our friends. Remember Crazy Frog again?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/98960/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alan Marsden receives funding from the AHRC (UK) and JSPS (Japan) and is editor of Journal of New Music Research.</span></em></p>Most people have strong opinions on what makes a song good or bad. But is anyone actually right?Alan Marsden, Senior Lecturer in Music, Lancaster UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/836992017-09-08T22:49:23Z2017-09-08T22:49:23Z‘Is truth overrated?’ What the experts say<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/185311/original/file-20170908-24217-vi9jmn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Is speaking some evil really so bad?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/g/VMKphotos">VMKphotos/shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>Editor’s note: As part of our collaboration with “<a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/third-rail/home/">Third Rail with OZY,</a>” we asked scholars from a variety of disciplines to answer the question: “Is truth overrated?”</em></p>
<h2>Objectivity and truth in the fake news era</h2>
<p><strong>Maryanne Reed, West Virginia University</strong></p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/185321/original/file-20170908-32271-ehh03g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/185321/original/file-20170908-32271-ehh03g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/185321/original/file-20170908-32271-ehh03g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/185321/original/file-20170908-32271-ehh03g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/185321/original/file-20170908-32271-ehh03g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=647&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/185321/original/file-20170908-32271-ehh03g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=647&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/185321/original/file-20170908-32271-ehh03g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=647&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Seek the truth and minimize harm. That’s how we instruct young journalists to prepare for the profession. Until recently, factual, objective reporting has been the mantra of modern journalism. But is objectivity a relevant concept in the era of <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/fake-news-33438">fake news</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/three-ways-facebook-could-reduce-fake-news-without-resorting-to-censorship-69033">filter bubbles</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-each-side-of-the-partisan-divide-thinks-the-other-is-living-in-an-alternate-reality-71458">alternative facts</a>? </p>
<p>In dealing with a less-than-truthful presidential administration, mainstream media has become more adversarial. News articles and broadcasts sound like editorials, with journalists labeling President Trump a “liar” and warning citizens about what they describe as dangerous tilt toward fascism. The masthead of the venerable Washington Post now says, “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” a strongly worded statement reflected in its sharply critical coverage of the Trump presidency. </p>
<p>It may be time for a recalibration of the notion of objectivity. In recent years, the concept been watered down by the practice of “balanced” reporting. Each side is given equal time, regardless of the relative merit of their arguments, creating false equivalencies and confusing the public. </p>
<p>Perhaps, journalists should apply their craft using a more scientific approach. Scientists, too, seek the truth. But they pursue evidence based solutions, regardless of TV ratings, circulation numbers or social media “likes.” </p>
<p>Journalism could adopt a similar approach as it struggles to regain its relevance. The best way forward is not necessarily a return to objectivity. Rather, it is through a rigorous approach to seeking and telling the truth – one that relies on real facts and the preponderance of evidence. Our profession and our democracy depend on it. </p>
<p><em>Maryanne Reed is the dean of the Reed College of Media at West Virginia University.</em></p>
<h2>Politicians lie; democracy needs truth</h2>
<p><strong>Christopher Beem, Penn State University</strong></p>
<p>Last month, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/08/22/president-trumps-list-of-false-and-misleading-claims-tops-1000/">The Washington Post’s Fact Checker</a> published an updated accounting of all the false and misleading claims made by President Donald Trump since he assumed office: 1,057: an average of five per day. </p>
<p>That is, to be sure, a big number. But does it really matter? <a href="http://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/politics/english/e_polit/">George Orwell famously said,</a> “political language… is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable.” Orwell speaks for most of us: To be a politician is to lie. And therefore many will ask: Five times a day, or 25 – What difference, really, does it make? </p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/the-power-of-ordinary-people-facing-totalitarianism-73589">Hannah Arendt</a> was a political philosopher and a Jew who escaped Hitler’s Germany and settled in New York. In her essay, <a href="https://idanlandau.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/arendt-truth-and-politics.pdf">“Truth and Politics</a>,” she asked this very question. She argued that democratic society requires that we agree on two things. First, that there are such things as facts. And second, that we should strive to present those facts as best we understand them. In other words, we should try to tell the truth. </p>
<p>Why? Because the more a politician – like the president, for example – fails to live up to these agreements, the more difficult it becomes for the rest of us to agree with, dispute or even assess what he says. When this happens, debate becomes increasingly pointless. And at some point, democracy itself is imperiled. </p>
<p>If Arendt is right, then lies do matter. Especially now, telling the truth is a deeply political act. </p>
<p><em>Christopher Beem is the managing director of the McCourtney Institute for Democracy at Penn State University.</em></p>
<h2>The label ‘anti-science’</h2>
<p><strong>Troy Campbell, University of Oregon</strong></p>
<p>Today, a person who denies climate change or any fact agreed upon by the scientific community is often immediately labeled “anti-science.” However, people who deny individual scientific facts may be more friendly toward science than we think. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/01/29/public-and-scientists-views-on-science-and-society">A 2015 Pew Research poll</a> found that 79 percent of Americans felt that “science had made life easier for most people.” </p>
<p>When, how and why science is denied, ignored or pushed aside has less to do with a complete distrust of the scientific method and more to do with trust of individual sources, misinformation, <a href="https://www.wired.com/2014/11/solutions-shape-factual-belief/">isolated instances of motivated denial</a> or even what my colleagues and I call a “<a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-people-fly-from-facts/">flight from fact</a>” rather than a straightforward “denial of fact.” </p>
<p>Almost every single person denies science at sometime. When I was younger, I denied the findings of the doctor who diagnosed me with hypoglycemia. Labeling me, then the top science student at my high school, “anti-science” would have been ludicrous. Rather, I was biased and motivated to deny an individual scientific fact that meant I would have to give up all my favorite foods. </p>
<p>It is bias, motivations, polarization and echo chambers that cause the real problems around science acceptance. And unfortunately, the simplified label “anti-science” often covers up these problems and prevents us from communicating scientific truth.</p>
<p>If we love science, then we need to starting being more scientific about science denial.</p>
<p><em>Troy Campbell is an assistant professor of marketing a the University of Oregon.</em></p>
<h2>Supposedly neutral information spaces and truth</h2>
<p><strong>Dan Klyn, University of Michigan</strong></p>
<p>In monetized information space, the truth isn’t overrated – it doesn’t rate at all. </p>
<p>Senator Ted Stevens got it almost right: These places aren’t so much <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f99PcP0aFNE">a series of tubes</a> as they are a <a href="https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/panoply">panoply</a> of rectangles. And from smartphone apps to television studio sets, the arrangement of the information in these rectilinear spaces is set up to seem “neutral.” </p>
<p>Since the time of <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Vitruvius">Vitruvius</a>, Western conceptions of space have taught us that what’s at the top is tops, the utmost. This archaic spatial hierarchy has followed us into digital space. Horizontal streams of news and information flow at the bottom without regard to value. But what’s at the top of the screen – that’s still special. </p>
<p>So, is this special space reserved for what’s most true? No, something more important goes there – the content that’s most likely to make money.</p>
<p><em>Dan Klyn teaches information architecture at the University of Michigan.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/83699/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daniel Klyn consults to and co-owns The Understanding Group, an information architecture consultancy in Ann Arbor and Grand Rapids Michigan. He is currently serving as President of the Information Architecture Institute, a 501(c)(6) board of trade that seeks to expand opportunity for people and organizations doing information architecture work.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Christopher Beem, Maryanne Reed, and Troy Campbell do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>We gave four scholars from different disciplines a chance to offer their opinions on this important question.Daniel Klyn, Intermittent Lecturer I in Information, University of MichiganChristopher Beem, Managing Director of the McCourtney Institute of Democracy, Penn StateMaryanne Reed, Dean of the Reed College of Media, West Virginia UniversityTroy Campbell, Assistant Professor of Marketing, University of OregonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/578562016-04-22T10:04:44Z2016-04-22T10:04:44ZCould Donald Trump change journalism for the better?<p>It is unsurprising that wherever Donald Trump goes, headlines follow. But what is particularly interesting is just how many of those headlines involve the practice of journalism and journalists themselves. </p>
<p>Trump has called to <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/02/donald-trump-libel-laws-219866">“open up” libel laws.</a> He has <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/27/us/politics/donald-trump-says-his-mocking-of-new-york-times-reporter-was-misread.html?_r=0">mocked</a> New York Times reporter Serge Kovaleski’s disability. He has <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/01/27/the-long-strange-history-of-the-donald-trump-megyn-kelly-feud/">feuded with Fox News’ Megyn Kelly</a> over questions she asked of him during a Republican presidential debate. And then there are the <a href="http://fortune.com/2016/03/12/donald-trump-rally-arrest/">accusations of violence against journalists</a> at Trump rallies.</p>
<p>Trump so challenges the norms and conventions of politics, it has caused some to express anxiety about the “<a href="http://democracyjournal.org/alcove/trump-and-the-fragility-of-democratic-culture/">corrosion of democratic culture</a>” as a result of the damage he leaves in his wake.</p>
<p>Journalists, as chroniclers of the political system, are confronted with a dilemma. How should journalists cover Trump’s candidacy? Can they – and <em>should</em> they – be objective?</p>
<p>Objectivity is a much misunderstood concept and is too often <a href="http://jou.sagepub.com/content/13/4/435.short">uncritically mythologized</a> as central to American journalistic practice. What interests me is how the pressure to be objective – and therefore disengaged from the very real impact Trump is having on the democratic process – may impede journalists’ crucial role as stewards of democracy.</p>
<h2>The Cokie Roberts case</h2>
<p>In March, longtime NPR commentator Cokie Roberts received flak from journalists, including some of her NPR colleagues, for <a href="http://cjonline.com/opinion/2016-02-26/steve-and-cokie-roberts-gop-must-stop-trump-now">coauthoring a column</a> that argued that Trump is</p>
<blockquote>
<p>one of the least qualified candidates ever to make a serious run for the presidency. If he is nominated by a major party – let alone elected – the reputation of the United States would suffer a devastating blow around the world.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119727/original/image-20160421-27019-168uowj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/119727/original/image-20160421-27019-168uowj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=825&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119727/original/image-20160421-27019-168uowj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=825&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119727/original/image-20160421-27019-168uowj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=825&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119727/original/image-20160421-27019-168uowj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1037&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119727/original/image-20160421-27019-168uowj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1037&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/119727/original/image-20160421-27019-168uowj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1037&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Cokie Roberts.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cokie_Roberts-a.jpg">National Archives</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Roberts was roundly chastised by her colleagues and NPR executives for failing to adhere to the objectivity norm – this despite her status as a commentator. </p>
<p>Morning Edition host David Greene even expressed his disappointment with Roberts <a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/03/14/470340825/npr-clarifies-cokie-roberts-role-after-anti-trump-column">on the air</a>, telling her that “objectivity is so fundamental to what we do” and asking, “can you blame people like me for being a little disappointed to hear you come out and take a personal position on something like this in a campaign?” </p>
<p>Roberts defended her column by describing herself as someone who is nonpartisan but “interested in government working.” Her argument was essentially an appeal to basic democratic values and the manner in which Trump is challenging them.</p>
<p>In contrast – and providing a masterful illustration of the tension between journalistic and business values – CBS head Leslie Moonves <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/02/les-moonves-trump-cbs-220001">recently told an audience of investors</a> that while Trump “may not be good for America” he is “damn good for CBS…The money’s rolling in.”</p>
<h2>Is your analyst my commentator?</h2>
<p>NPR’s dilemma speaks to broader shifts in the media ecosystem. </p>
<p>A <a href="http://jmq.sagepub.com/content/92/2/468">study I coauthored with Elizabeth Blanks Hindman</a> examined the responses of journalists to NPR’s decision to <a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130712737">fire analyst Juan Williams</a> for comments he made on Fox News in 2010 about feeling “nervous” about sharing a plane with Muslims. </p>
<p>The responses indicated much confusion about Williams’ role, with some pondering what exactly it means to be an “analyst” as versus, say, a “reporter” or a “commentator.” Others criticized Williams for not adhering to the objectivity norm.</p>
<p>We found similar findings in <a href="http://jmq.sagepub.com/content/90/2/267.short">our study</a> of journalistic responses to the retirement of veteran White House correspondent <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/07/helen-thomas-trailblazing-reporter-dead-at-92-168818">Helen Thomas</a> following <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/04/white-house-reporter-helen-thomas-apologizes-saying-jews-hell-palestine.html">controversial remarks</a> she made that Israel should “get the hell out of Palestine.” The majority of responses we analyzed criticized Thomas for failing to be objective regarding the Israel-Palestine conflict, when in fact her role at the time was as an opinion columnist.</p>
<p>We see these findings as markers of broader uncertainties about 21st-century journalism. To question objectivity is to invite the larger question of what we expect of the 21st-century journalist. Is “objectivity,” at least as presently understood, fit for purpose?</p>
<p>The fact is that Cokie Roberts is not the only one to express her unease about Trump’s candidacy. </p>
<p>The Huffington Post has taken to <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/01/huffpost-to-publish-anti-trump-kicker-with-all-trump-coverage-218345">appending an editor’s note to every article about Trump</a> informing readers that he is “a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist, birther, and bully.” </p>
<p>The Boston Globe attracted attention for a cover that ran on the front of its Sunday edition’s Ideas section presented as an account of <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/11/business/media/boston-globe-envisions-trump-presidency-with-mock-front-page.html?_r=0">what life would look like under President Trump</a>, with mass deportations and trade wars the new normal.</p>
<p>How, then, should journalists respond to an <a href="http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/how-authoritarianism-took-over-gop-and-allowed-emergence-emperor-trump">authoritarian</a> candidate who incites violence, fuels racial tension and fractures the social fabric by indulging the worst excesses of American bigotry? </p>
<h2>‘Journalists owe democracy their allegiance’</h2>
<p>The first defense of Roberts column is to point out that it was an opinion column written by a commentator. Roberts was, in effect, doing what she is paid to do: opine. This makes the criticism of her column all the more bizarre.</p>
<p>However, the second and more fundamental defense is to consider at a deeper level how journalists in a liberal democracy respond to phenomena that challenge the very precepts of liberal democracy.</p>
<p>This is a much-needed conversation, and one that has long been stifled by a narrow conception of objectivity. Too often objectivity, as it is practiced, emphasizes neutrality and balance at all costs. This can be seen, for example, in coverage of the human impact on <a href="http://www.cjr.org/essay/the_danger_of_fair_and_balance.php">climate change</a> as a question still being debated when an overwhelming majority of scientists believe there is unassailable evidence that it is a fact that needs to be dealt with. </p>
<p>This kind of objectivity positions the journalist as a “morally disengaged” communicator possessing, as <a href="http://www.columbia.edu/itc/journalism/j6075/edit/readings/glasser.html">the ethicist Ted Glasser argues</a>, </p>
<blockquote>
<p>neither the need nor the opportunity to develop a critical perspective from which to assess the events, the issues, and the personalities he or she is assigned to cover.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In “<a href="http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/jbp/jlp/2008/00000007/00000001/art00007">The Limits of Objective Reporting</a>,” the philosopher Raphael Cohen-Almagor argues that </p>
<blockquote>
<p>subjectivity is preferable to objectivity when the media cover illiberal and anti-democratic phenomena.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Cohen-Almagor argues – and I concur – that when confronted with issues that challenge the basic values of liberal democracy itself, journalists are called to set aside moral neutrality. </p>
<p>From this perspective, journalism ought to be nonpartisan in party terms but wholly on the side of democracy, good governance and the protection of people’s rights and civil liberties.</p>
<p>As Cohen-Almagor says, journalists </p>
<blockquote>
<p>live within the democratic realm and owe democracy their allegiance. Free speech and free journalism exist because democracy makes them possible.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is not so unusual an idea, and ought not be controversial. Indeed, we don’t need to go that far back into journalism history to find examples of it. </p>
<p>One of the reasons <a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1872668">Edward R. Murrow is regarded as one of the finest American journalists</a> is because of his opposition to the demagoguery of Joseph McCarthy, devoting an episode of “See It Now” to a methodical exposition of McCarthy’s smears and deceits.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-YOIueFbG4g?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Murrow recognized the threat that McCarthy (and McCarthyism) posed to the fabric of American democracy and acted with conviction. Where is today’s Edward R. Murrow?</p>
<p>Trump is testing the boundaries of the political system. His platform and proclamations, and the manner in which he articulates them, pose such a challenge to regular order that it becomes necessary to ask if the norms of political coverage ought to be rethought. </p>
<p>Perhaps a new journalistic vocabulary is necessary. Trump’s candidacy may provide just the occasion for such a rethink.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/57856/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ryan J. Thomas does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Trump’s campaign challenges the conventions of politics and liberal democracy. So maybe the time has come to question how journalists practice objectivity.Ryan J. Thomas, Assistant Professor, Journalism Studies, University of Missouri-ColumbiaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/530682016-01-22T04:05:10Z2016-01-22T04:05:10ZVoices of the poor are missing from South Africa’s media<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/108847/original/image-20160121-9728-1cu3rz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A typical community protest over the delivery of basic services in South Africa. A study shows protesters often resort to violence to attract attention. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Reuters/Mike Hutchings</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Poor communities in South Africa feel that their voices are not heard and their issues not taken seriously by the media.</p>
<p>This is clear in the findings of an international <a href="http://www.mecodem.eu/">research project</a> on the role of media in conflicts arising from transitions from authoritarian rule to democratic government. It focused on four countries – South Africa, Egypt, Kenya and Serbia. </p>
<p>The study shows that in all four countries, citizenship conflicts are frequently reduced to judicial factors. The media’s approach to conflicts is to look at them from the perspective of rights rather than cultural factors. </p>
<p>In South Africa, rather than wilful distortion or neglect on the part of journalists, the findings expose systemic problems underpinning news agendas and coverage.</p>
<p>The project, now in its second year, has drawn on content analysis of print media and interviews with journalists and activists. </p>
<h2>Understanding conflict in South Africa</h2>
<p>South Africa’s formal transition from apartheid to democracy <a href="http://www.sahistory.org.za/article/south-african-general-elections-1994">in 1994</a> is often heralded as peaceful and smooth when viewed in institutional and procedural terms.</p>
<p>But there are lingering problems. Dissent over the unrealised dividends of democracy for the poor and widespread perceptions of government as corrupt have resulted in <a href="https://theconversation.com/protests-soar-amid-unmet-expectations-in-south-africa-42013">ongoing protests</a>. </p>
<p>Anger over <a href="http://www.tradingeconomics.com/south-africa/unemployment-rate">unemployment</a>, <a href="https://africacheck.org/factsheets/factsheet-the-housing-situation-in-south-africa/">housing</a>, <a href="http://www.plaas.org.za/blog/social-protests-and-water-service-delivery-south-africa">water and sanitation</a>, <a href="http://www.municipalservicesproject.org/publication/electricity-crisis-soweto">electricity</a>, <a href="http://www.iol.co.za/news/politics/protesters-tighten-grip-on-power-1.1499907">corruption in municipalities</a>, and health and crime have all been listed as reasons for the rising number of protests which started in the <a href="http://wiser.wits.ac.za/event/public-positions-crisis-democratic-representation-local-government">early 2000s</a>. </p>
<p>The protests are not only aimed at getting basic public services such as water, sanitation and electricity. They are also part of <a href="http://democracyinafrica.org/youth-political-protest-south-africa/">wider disillusionment</a> at the failure of democracy to meet basic needs as well as an attempt by the poor to be heard and included in democratic discourse and policy-making.</p>
<p>This <a href="https://www.enca.com/south-africa/protests-signal-rebellion-poor">“rebellion of the poor”</a> can thus be considered “democratisation conflicts”. They are similar to those in other transitional democracies where the struggle for equality and human rights did not end with the advent of formal democracy. </p>
<p>While it is widely acknowledged that violent protests are becoming more prevalent in South Africa, the role that the media plays in the cycle of protest and violence is not widely understood. </p>
<p>Our <a href="http://www.mecodem.eu/countries/south-africa/">ongoing study</a> indicates that South African community protests receive unfavourable coverage. The reporting also routinely fails to provide depth and context to explain the underlying issues that lead to the protests.</p>
<p>Frequently protests are reported only inasmuch as they inconvenience a middle-class audience, for instance to inform them where traffic may be disrupted. </p>
<p>While journalists are often sympathetic to protesters, they strive for “objective” coverage so as not to come across as supporting a particular side. The result is superficial and limited reporting. Underlying structural issues are not unpacked.</p>
<p>Journalists list time pressures and juniorisation of the newsrooms as some of the reasons for limited in-depth coverage. </p>
<p>And commercial pressures also result in media focusing on protests as drama in an attempt to attract the interest of middle-class audiences. </p>
<h2>Fighting to be heard</h2>
<p>Very few media articles about protests include interviews with protesters. It seems that protesters’ voices remain unheard, even as their actions are reported. Communities report that photographers are often sent to take photographs without being accompanied by reporters to interview them. </p>
<p>Activists from poor communities report that they only get media attention when they go to extremes, such as causing damage. Protesters told researchers that when they called the media to cover their issues, they were asked if “anything is burning”. If nothing is burning, journalists don’t come and don’t report.</p>
<p>Activists report that with the failure of government channels of communication, and poor media coverage of their plight, the only way to be seen is to create a violent spectacle. </p>
<p>They say that participating in government-created spaces for engagement, such as ward councils and municipal integrated development plans, does not lead to satisfactory responses. </p>
<p>This suggests that protest actions follow a calculated logic, despite activists’ impressions that they are often depicted in the media as being out of control.</p>
<p>While there is some coverage in the media that protests are related to structural economic circumstances, they do not reflect the frustrations experienced by communities over government’s empty promises. </p>
<p>Also, scant regard is given to the failure of participatory processes to address grievances. No attention is paid to the failures of capitalism to address inequality. The heavy-handed response from government to silence protest is also underplayed. </p>
<p>Media coverage differs noticeably depending on the respective outlets. In print, the <a href="http://www.dailysun.co.za/">Daily Sun</a> provides the most coverage of protests. This bears out the tabloid’s claims to provide news from the perspective of the poor and the working class. </p>
<p>Compared to their upmarket print media counterparts like the <a href="http://mg.co.za/">Mail & Guardian</a> and <a href="http://www.bdlive.co.za/">Business Day</a>, the Daily Sun is also the most critical of most aspects of democracy. It is often the only newspaper where sources are ordinary citizens. For media serving the middle class, sources are mostly drawn from officials or the elite.</p>
<h2>Improving reporting of community protests</h2>
<p>The activists we interviewed believe that media could play a big role in boosting democracy in the country by highlighting the issues poor communities face before they spill over into violent conflicts.</p>
<p>A focus on community politics could shine a spotlight on the most marginalised and vulnerable citizens, and in turn could help focus government attention where it is most needed. Media coverage – favourable or unfavourable – added pressure on government to quickly resolve issues.</p>
<p>Activists felt that they would prefer not to have to go to extremes to get media attention. But they also recognised that their protests kept community issues on the agenda.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>This article was co-authored with Rebecca Pointer, research assistant at the Centre for Film and Media Studies, UCT.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/53068/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Herman Wasserman leads a team of researchers that receives funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 613370. Project Term: 1.2.2014 – 31.1.2017.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tanja Bosch is part of a team of researchers that receives funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 613370. Project Term: 1.2.2014 – 31.1.2017.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Wallace Chuma does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The advent of democracy in South Africa in 1994 is often hailed as peaceful and smooth. But, there are lingering problems. Dissent over unmet expectations has resulted in an increase in protests.Herman Wasserman, Professor of Media Studies and Director of the Centre for Film and Media Studies, University of Cape TownTanja Bosch, Senior Lecturer in Media Studies, University of Cape TownWallace Chuma, Lecturer in Media Studies, University of Cape TownLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/493062015-10-18T12:00:35Z2015-10-18T12:00:35ZMedia feel pressure as divisions widen on the role of journalists in South Africa<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/98723/original/image-20151017-25146-1uansg1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Journalists Thami Mazwai, left, and Jon Qwelane before the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's special hearing on the media. They accused the white-owned press of colluding with apartheid.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Reuters</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>This month marks the 45th anniversary of the clampdown on the press and the Black Consciousness Movement in South Africa. The day is known as <a href="http://www.apartheidmuseum.org/sites/default/files/files/BIKO%203b.pdf">Black Wednesday</a> and is also commemorated as <a href="http://www.gov.za/speeches/president-jacob-zuma-hosts-editors-and-senior-journalists-18-oct-15-oct-2015-0000">National Press Freedom Day</a>.</em></p>
<p>On October 19, South Africans <a href="http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/files/27747/12260524373Joe_Thloloe.pdf/Joe%2BThloloe.pdf">commemorate</a> the banning of the World, the Weekend World and the detention of their journalists in 1977. This was a time when the apartheid state restricted the media and controlled what could be reported. Also banned was <a href="http://www.iol.co.za/sundayindependent/remembering-qoboza-s-sense-of-duty-1.1594527#.ViI2CX4rLnA">Pro Veritate</a>, an ecumenical publication.</p>
<p>Today, the <a href="http://www.gov.za/sites/www.gov.za/files/images/a108-96.pdf">Constitution</a> guarantees unprecedented freedom of the media. But South Africans can’t agree on what journalism should be.</p>
<p>Recently, the editor of The New Age, veteran journalist <a href="http://www.tnamedia.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=142&Itemid=199">Moegsien Williams</a>, argued that the commercial press acts like a <a href="http://www.news24.com/Opinions/Media-acts-like-the-unelected-opposition-20150807">political opposition</a> because of the dominance of the governing African National Congress (ANC) in political life. </p>
<p>According to Williams, many journalists are closely identified with opposition parties. Another editor, Steven Motale, of The Citizen daily newspaper, publicly <a href="http://citizen.co.za/446139/446139/">apologised</a> to President Jacob Zuma for negative reporting about him.</p>
<p>On the other hand, certain journalist and union groupings have combined under the <a href="http://www.r2k.org.za/">Right2Know</a> campaign to protest proposals to regulate the media. In particular, they oppose suggestions of a <a href="http://www.r2k.org.za/2011/06/03/dlf-calls-for-overhaul-of-protection-of-information-bill-and-rejects-the-media-appeals-tribunal/">media tribunal</a>. </p>
<p>The Media Tribunal proposed by the ANC is designed as <a href="http://www.anc.org.za/show.php?id=11698">a “system of accountability”</a> to “ensure redress whenever the media infringes on the rights of others”. The ANC wants to revisit defamation law, and consider legislating the right of reply. The move is vehemently opposed by the <a href="http://www.sanef.org.za/news/entry/sanef_statement_on_anc_ngc_resolution_on_the_media_appeals_tribunal-15_octo/">South African National Editors’ Forum</a>. </p>
<p>Pressures on journalists can be insidious. <a href="http://wiredspace.wits.ac.za/handle/10539/11766">One study</a> showed that reporters receive calls and text messages from government functionaries to pressure them.</p>
<p>It seems the country is more divided than ever on the media. However, this is yet another phase in a history of journalism that has always been conflicted, and where many journalists have passionately taken up their role. </p>
<h2>The halcyon days of black journalism</h2>
<p>Consider, for example, <a href="http://www.sahistory.org.za/people/henry-mr-drum-nxumalo">Henry Nxumalo</a>, one of the greatest investigative journalists in South Africa. Nxumalo became famous as “Mr Drum” in the 1950s, when he worked for the iconic <a href="http://www.uj.ac.za/EN/Library/Documents/Drum%20-%20the%20making%20of%20a%20magazine%20by%20Anthony%20Sampson.pdf">Drum magazine</a>. Drum’s mix of celebrity, sport, jazz and township features made it popular. But it was also criticised for a lack of engagement in the politics of the early apartheid era. </p>
<p>Nxumalo, according to Drum editor (and much later Nelson Mandela’s official biographer) <a href="https://books.google.co.za/books?id=VRdlAAAAMAAJ&q=anthony+sampson&dq=anthony+sampson&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEUQ6AEwB2oVChMIxPXQztLJyAIVRrgUCh2pFQjU">Anthony Sampson</a>, was the only reporter at the magazine with journalism experience. Nxumalo suggested Drum’s first big investigation: the abuse of contract workers at the <a href="http://pzacad.pitzer.edu/NAM/sophia/writers/maimane/maimaneS.htm">Bethal farms</a>. The story was a sensation, hurtling Drum into the spotlight. The magazine continued with investigations, adding substance to its generally light mix. </p>
<p>The Drum writers of the 1950s became well-known personalities in the townships for vividly portraying life under apartheid. <a href="http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,820505-2,00.html">The magazine</a> grew to be the largest circulation publication for black readers in South Africa.</p>
<p>It is not possible to say how Nxumalo would have described his role as a journalist. He was murdered while investigating a story.</p>
<p>But he put himself into extremely dangerous situations. In one case, he <a href="https://books.google.co.za/books?id=BxsILFdm-7IC&pg=PA161&lpg=PA161&dq=Mr+Drum+goes+to+jail&source=bl&ots=fOi_OY7YUa&sig=9jW7orA7Y46hwAn-6ovr_lWf2Xc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAmoVChMIhLqPlvfGyAIVxusUCh0s4AJs#v=onepage&q=Mr%20Drum%20goes%20to%20jail&f=false">went to jail</a> to write about prison conditions. He also got a job at a farm where a worker had been killed. This type of journalism – immersion into the lives of the most exploited people of society – is rarely done today.</p>
<p>Drum, despite the perception that it was politically lightweight, was banned in the 1960s. The emphasis on social context in the writing was seen as dangerous by the apartheid state, even though the magazine did not particularly position itself as a “fourth estate” or “watchdog of government”. </p>
<p>Craig Charney <a href="http://wiredspace.wits.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10539/8510/ISS-71.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y">notes</a> that increasing repression destroyed the “Drum school”. By the mid-1960s, “dashing figures” such as Nat Nakasa, Lewis Nkosi, Bloke Modisane, Todd Matshikiza and Can Themba had disappeared due to banning, exile or death.</p>
<h2>Activist journalism v objectivity</h2>
<p>Drum is an early example of black journalists running foul of the state. In 1977, the World and Weekend World, owned by the Argus Company, had their own moment when they were <a href="http://www.apartheidmuseum.org/sites/default/files/files/BIKO%203b.pdf">banned</a> for reporting on the <a href="http://www.sahistory.org.za/topic/june-16-soweto-youth-uprising">1976 Soweto student uprising</a>.</p>
<p>When he became editor, Percy Qoboza had seized control of the newspaper from the Argus’s white editorial director and focused it on serious political content. The World and Weekend World gave space to <a href="http://www.sahistory.org.za/archive/definition-black-consciousness-bantu-stephen-biko-december-1971-south-africa">Black Consciousness</a> ideas that were on the rise. </p>
<p>Charney’s research shows that, in the 1960s and 1970s, Black Consciousness activists courted black journalists, debating with them:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Are you a journalist first, or are you black first?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>They challenged the idea of objectivity, which was part of “professional” journalism. Professional values – impartiality, accuracy, fairness and providing all sides of the story – were enshrined in the codes of conduct of many newspapers. </p>
<p>But South African media served different communities. Scholars refer to three traditions in the print media – the English-language press, the Afrikaans press and the <a href="http://wiredspace.wits.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10539/8608/ISS-105.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y">black press</a>. </p>
<p>Afrikaans newspapers were closely aligned with the governing <a href="http://www.sahistory.org.za/topic/national-party-np">National Party</a>, while English titles were allied to the English-speaking community. Black readership newspapers were owned by white corporations, making them a “captive press”.</p>
<p>Lynette Steenveld notes that these <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/#/doi/abs/10.1080/02560054.2007.9653361">“ethnic presses”</a> adopted a professional journalistic culture, but had separate political identities and community loyalties. Whereas in countries like the United Kingdom, journalists may have negotiated their role in relation to class or party politics, in South Africa, race and ethnicity have been inescapable factors for journalistic identity. </p>
<p>The other legacy that has influenced South African journalists is reporting during the apartheid struggle. As people rose up against the system, and the state responded with increasing repression, some white journalists questioned whether it was possible to be impartial in an unjust society.</p>
<p>An <a href="https://books.google.co.za/books?id=6Z8JAAAACAAJ&dq=seeber+publishing&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y">alternative press</a> explicitly opposed the apartheid state. Their journalists came from mainstream presses, as well as from community and anti-apartheid publications. They redefined their roles away from “objectivity” towards <a href="https://books.google.co.za/books?id=a5ROAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=resistance+press&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CBsQ6AEwAGoVChMI8Pf9-tHJyAIVhlwUCh3gvgBx#v=onepage&q=resistance%20press&f=false">“advocacy journalism”</a>. Many aligned themselves with the anti-apartheid movements of the 1980s. </p>
<p>Although small, these publications had influence. They placed issues on the national news agenda and pushed the boundaries of what was discussed. They argued that the truth might not be served by “objective” approaches to reporting. A legacy of activist reporting persists among journalists today.</p>
<h2>The New South Africa</h2>
<p>The post-apartheid period has seen many debates about journalism. The print media has been accused of being complicit with apartheid, of being hostile to the ANC, of not telling “the African story”, of not transforming and of <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02560054.2007.9653361#abstract">racism</a>. The proposal of a media tribunal has been mooted several times. </p>
<p>While local passions flare, the global growth of social media promises to dramatically curtail journalists’ power. Across the world, journalists now compete with bloggers, community reporters, entertainment websites, and citizens posting to social media. </p>
<p>These writers are not bound by journalistic ethics and values. They cannot easily be held to account by governments. Journalists’ historical role of providing information and opinion is under threat from these global developments, even more than from an angry state. Renegotiating the role of journalism in these times may be the biggest challenge yet.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/49306/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lesley Cowling does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>South Africa seems more divided than ever on the media, as the governing ANC revives plans for a dreaded tribunal many fear would muzzle the press.Lesley Cowling, Associate Professor in the Department of Journalism, University of the WitwatersrandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.