"The media isn't supposed to be neutral - it is supposed to be objective."

[KyuzoGator]

Great article.

http://snipurl.com/q5te

-snip-

The media isn't supposed to be neutral - it is supposed to be objective. There is an enormous difference between the two. And this is a difference that has been lost on the mainstream media for quite awhile now.

Conservatives have shouted from the rooftops that the media isn't being fair to them when they report news that shows conservatives in a bad light. But it isn't the media's job to decide what is and is not fair to any political party. Their job is to report the news -- whatever it might be.

Republicans have pulled a very effective switcheroo on the press, substituting the concept of neutrality for objectivity. Whenever the press dares to report something that does not reflect well on the Republican Party, it gets accused of having a "bias." As Stephen Colbert would say, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."

-snip-

[American liberal]

1. hear, hear! n/t

[SeaBob]

2. Media

Also along these lines I remember when the media was supposed to Balanced. this was generally taken to mean that if a station presented one side of a situation or a opinion they had to allow the opposing view equal time. Thanks to newt's Contract with America this went the way of the doo doo. Thanks newt AKA shit for brains

[KyuzoGator]

4. Actually, didn't Reagan dispose of the "fairness doctrine"?

But as the article states, I'd much rather have the news be objective than balanced.

When people write about Hitler, they don't feel obligated to "balance" the criticism with an opposing viewpoint. Call a spade a spade.

[babylonsister]

3. Objectivity has been lost sadly; that's why we applaud when we

hear it, and why the current crop of 'journalists' were so turned off by someone who spoke the truth.

[KyuzoGator]

5. kick nt