Advocacy Or Objectivity?
My friend John Wilder emailed me information from Editor and Publisher, the house magazine for newspaper editors around the country. Steve Outing wrote a column calling for the end of objectivity in newspapers when the subject is, sharp intake of breath, global warming. In Climate Change: Get Over Objectivity, Newspapers, Outing writes that advocacy journalism has been relegated to alternative newspapers and mainstream newspapers try to maintain their facade of objectivity.
I have no quibble with the status quo when it comes to controversial issues where there is a significant split of opinion. Outside of the opinion section, most newspapers are not going to allow writers and editors to express an opinion on hot debates like the right to abortion, or public funding for stem cell research.
But, sharp intake of breath, global warming, is different. The consensus of scientists, he writes, agrees that there is, sharp intake of breath, global warming, and it is human caused. Therefore newspapers should stop being objective about the subject and become advocates.
But advocacy in terms of encouraging people to act to alleviate climate change is really a wholly different issue. There’s clearly scientific consensus that humans are altering the planet’s climate, and that the effect is accelerating.
Outing “knows” the truth and that truth should be advocated.
As long as news organizations keep alive the idea that there’s still a “debate” about whether human-induced climate change is real or not, people have an excuse for not changing their behavior.
I’m not going to argue with Outing. I’ve written many times about the, sharp intake of breath, global warming hoax. I do however like his idea of advocacy. I would like all the MSM to give up up on the idea that they are being objective. I want them to declare up front that they are liberal, that they vote democratic, that they want Hillary or Obama or McCain to be our next president. I want the MSM to own up to their love of statism, and the Federal Reserve. I want them to say up front that they support gay marriage and abortion on demand, even in the third trimester. I want them to tell us straight out that appeasement is the only way to avoid war and “land for peace” is the solution in the Mideast wars.
Stop trying to be objective. If the MSM supports the opposing views I want to hear them say that, too. Let us decide who we want to listen to based on their views. Based on the success of Air America the truth will send many in the MSM into the trash bin.
Steve Outing
href=”http://technorati.com/tag/Global+Warming” rel=”tag”>Global Warming
href=”http://technorati.com/tag/Mover+Mike” rel=”tag”>Mover Mike
Footnote, dated August 29, 2007:
SURVEY: LESS THAN HALF OF ALL PUBLISHED SCIENTISTS ENDORSE GLOBAL WARMING THEORY; COMPREHENSIVE SURVEY OF PUBLISHED CLIMATE RESEARCH REVEALS CHANGING VIEWPOINTS
As long as you want the impossible, you may as well stay up late and wait on the tooth fairy to leave some money under your pillow, no less ridiculous as waiting for the MSM to come clean about their stance on liberal issues.
But the audacity TF, of suggesting the MSM give up their objectivity on just this one issue.