Equal Opportunity Skeptics

Nobody ever believes this, but I'm going to say it anyway. While all journalists, as human beings, have opinions, most of us find it easy to ignore them when we're reporting. We automatically click into another reality, where the greater truth is achieved by relevant facts and context, as opposed to by advocacy. Long ago, I realized that most issues of the day have honorable arguments on both sides. For me as a reporter, the thrilling intellectual challenge is articulating them... to be the viewer's or reader's honest broker.

Why, you ask, do I tell you this. Because, I answer, I'm reading and hearing the spasms over the Hillary Clinton interview conducted by George Stephanopoulos. The critics bluster that Stephanopoulos shouldn't have done it because he was part of the Clinton White House.

The logical extension is that someone who had previously been a worker for one officeholder, candidate or cause was forever disqualified from journalism, because he or she cannot approach their former employer, organization to say nothing of their advesaries, with a clear, unbiased open mind. That is just not so.

George, for instance, is a tremendous reporter, who seems to approach ex-friends and foes with the same skepticism that is supposed to be the everday hallmark of our profession. So is his Sunday talk show competitor Tim Russert, who worked for New York Democrats Cuomo and Moynihan. So is his colleague Pete Williams, NBC's phenomenal Justice Correspondent, who was Defense Secretary Dick Cheney's spokesman in a previous life. Does anyone question Diane Sawyers reporting chops? Does anyone even care she worked one time for Richard Nixon?

I suppose I should mention that I know each and every one of the above, and have been at some of the same parties. But, short of a current or contemplated business relationship, such things don't matter. The question is: Can the person who has "crossed over" adhere to the cliche "If your mother says she loves you, check it out". All those I mentioned can and do, constantly. We all probably have very frustrated mothers.

There is so much wrong with media today, seriously wrong, but the problems are complex. To focus on a few personalities is simplistic and the charge that someone cannot put his opinions aside when he or she is working as a reporter is flat wrong. Not everyone does, but certainly the ones I've specified have proven it can be done, and done well. It's not even difficult. Although it's probably harder than blindly criticizing someone without knowing what you're talking about.

Comments

[ljsfolly]

I think you come from a good place and are probably a nice guy. I don't think I hear and see or read anyone who fits your ideal reporter.So many have a range within which they work that doesn't disclose a lot of their beliefs but the wild nut jobs on the ends of each spectrum are the ones who get the most attention and draw into their spheres of nut worlds those who don't spend too much time looking for the truth or reality. That is the majority of the country when you look at the ratings. We all know who they are and as they were led down the slime road of bushville they will continue to let others tell them what they think and should do and feel.

[realitytrumpsbull]

A reporter's job, more or less, is to ask copious questions, make independent observation of the circumstances, and to the best of their
mortal ability, from the answers to those questions and observations deduce the 5 w's,
who, what, when, where, why( and how?). Anyway,
just the facts, ma'am, just the facts.
What we've got instead is tele-newsies who
are showing off their hair, cleavage, clothing,
dental work, and complete lack of respect
for the public's intellect, not necessarily
in that order. Enter The Internets, bane
of capped-tooth reporting. Ruh roh. Counter-view
and counter-facts, causing the consumption of
a lot of over-the-counter headache remedies,
no doubt, in boardrooms nationwide as the
perpetual advertising bed news format shudders
and stumbles...Global Daily WebNews on the march...endless hordes of independent contributors...the horror...the horror...

[melbaker]

As a working Television journalist I agree with you. While I have very strong personal opinions and views on a variety of subjects I work hard to make certain that my copy is unbiased.
The best compliment I've ever received is by a coworker who said, "I know how strongly you feel about (the aforementioned issue) I was shocked that you were able to write it that well."
The issue that plagues us really revolves around the fact that we have lost the clear line between editorial and journalism.
If journalists are forced into making opinion, as so much of TV talk now demands, then they should make it clear. You're on the editorial page now and now we're back to reporting.
Sadly, the distinction between the two has been thrown out over the last decade, so that Fox News can say - with a straight face - that it is "Fair and Balanced" when all of it's political reporting is pure farce.

[TheDude1369]

bob, it's not whether reporters can remain objective. it's the editors and the mbas. reporters don't really have a chance and only some of them even notice the missing substance. i mean can you really afford to piss off advertisers. screw the politicians and reporters, the puppetmaster is the master of all, corporate greed. the symptoms of a degrading society manifested by share price, profits and vanities. a country ruled by corrupters who lack any core values due to being educated in a system which negates and penalizes non-instructed and original thought which is at it's essence, the exhibition of moral character.

plainly, bob, the press has some credibility issues; all of which are self-inflicted.

[JuanDimensional]

With all due respect,

I find it difficult to believe that having a personal or working relationship with a politician does nothing to affect the manner in which a reporter perceives and reports re that politician. Whether it's through previous friendship or enmity, or simply similar political goals and views, all other things being equal, the reporter without a personal relationship is the more trustworthy. Further, the comfortable relationship between politicians and elite journalists is a triumph of the very human desire of people to hang out with the powerful.