<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: the difference between &#8216;fair&#8217; and &#8216;objective&#8217;.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2006/10/02/the-difference-between-fair-and-objective/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2006/10/02/the-difference-between-fair-and-objective/</link>
	<description>let's activate something</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:27:14 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Lora</title>
		<link>http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2006/10/02/the-difference-between-fair-and-objective/#comment-32</link>
		<dc:creator>Lora</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Oct 2006 22:54:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2006/10/02/the-difference-between-fair-and-objective/#comment-32</guid>
		<description>I've often thought that instead of "We report, you decide," Fox New's mantra should be, "We opine, you recline." It just fits better...

There are various problems with the media. One of the biggest ones is that in olden days, news was perceived as simply that, and not something that should make money. Now (at least tv news) is seen as something that should support itself -- it has acquired an entertainment-like feel. Scandals, disasters and fights seem to draw more viewers. 

Another issue with objectivity is funding: who owns the news outlets? Try this: http://www.mediachannel.org/ownership/chart.shtml Every organization has its bias and is unlikely to allow-whether implicitly or explicitly-anything it perceives as going against its corporate interests  s. 

My main beef is that I don't really think there's any such thing as objectivity. In my experience, how objective someone thinks they personally are usually directly correlates with their ethnic and socio-economic background (the more dominant or powerful the group, the more objective they feel they are), as well as identity superiority. Careful, fair reporting is incredibly lacking, and I'd agree it's something to be lauded in any journalist or publication. But I'm not sure objectivity per se is attainable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve often thought that instead of &#8220;We report, you decide,&#8221; Fox New&#8217;s mantra should be, &#8220;We opine, you recline.&#8221; It just fits better&#8230;</p>
<p>There are various problems with the media. One of the biggest ones is that in olden days, news was perceived as simply that, and not something that should make money. Now (at least tv news) is seen as something that should support itself &#8212; it has acquired an entertainment-like feel. Scandals, disasters and fights seem to draw more viewers. </p>
<p>Another issue with objectivity is funding: who owns the news outlets? Try this: <a href="http://www.mediachannel.org/ownership/chart.shtml" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview('/outbound/comment/http://www.mediachannel.org/ownership/chart.shtml');" rel="nofollow">http://www.mediachannel.org/ownership/chart.shtml</a> Every organization has its bias and is unlikely to allow-whether implicitly or explicitly-anything it perceives as going against its corporate interests  s. </p>
<p>My main beef is that I don&#8217;t really think there&#8217;s any such thing as objectivity. In my experience, how objective someone thinks they personally are usually directly correlates with their ethnic and socio-economic background (the more dominant or powerful the group, the more objective they feel they are), as well as identity superiority. Careful, fair reporting is incredibly lacking, and I&#8217;d agree it&#8217;s something to be lauded in any journalist or publication. But I&#8217;m not sure objectivity per se is attainable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
