One Objective Fact
“Atlanta Progressive News has parted ways with long-serving senior staff writer Jonathan Springston. Apparently, Springston’s affinity for fact-based reporting clashed with [APN’s] vision. . . . In an e-mail statement, editor Matthew Cardinale says Springston was asked to leave APN last week ‘because he held on to the notion that there was an objective reality that could be reported objectively, despite the fact that that was not our editorial policy at Atlanta Progressive News.’”
In a statement, APN editor Cardinale writes, “We believe there is no such thing as objective news. Typically, mainstream media presents itself as objective but is actually skewed towards promoting the corporate agenda of the ultra-wealthy.”
Whew.
(Thanks to alert WORDster Sara Hostetler)
Editor’s Note: I’ll never forget the day I saw a fact.
Today’s Wish-I-Were-Here Photo
.
Does no one learn logic anymore? First, Cardinale is confusing something that is (objective fact) with someone's action (mainstream media's reporting of the objective fact). Just because the latter, objective reporting by mainstream media, does not exist, it does not follow that the former, objective news, also does not exist. Second, Cardinale is confusing the specific actions of some with the possible actions of all. To refuse to try to drive from Chicago to New York because some drivers chose to draw their own map and ended up in L.A. is ludicrous.
ReplyDeleteHowever, Cardinale has the right to print whatever version of the "news" he sees fit -- as does mainstream media. Reader, be warned.
Get the exact date he was fired. We must mark that on the calendar of journalism history as the first known firing of a reporter for fact-based reporting.
ReplyDeleteOne wonders whether Mr. Cardinale objects to MoveOn.org because it has been financed in part by billionaire businessman George Soros, and/or whether Mr. Cardinale objects to the influence of liberal Hollywood multimillionaires on the news media.
ReplyDeleteAnne's analogy of the trip East from Chicago is perfect.
I don't agree with the firing of Jonathon Sprinston for having tried to repot the news objectively. He was trying to do his job to the best of his abilities. The thing I don't see happening is Jonathon being able to report completly objectively. It's not possible. Every one of us are ingrained with bias. We were all raised differently, went to different schools, had different rules we had to abide by as children. All of this and more skews how we see things in this world. Try as we may we'll never be able to obtain objectivity. I don't even see why we continue to use the term "objective". It seems so far away and difficult to achieve. It's like we're trying to obtain infinite. We're taught in math that it does exist, but how realistic is it? I think the same applies to objectivety.
ReplyDelete