Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg
Unbiased reporting is impossible. The question is not whether reporters and editors have biases, but how hard they attempt to overcome them.
|
The point is not to believe that the absolute absence of bias is possible for any journalist or newspaper. It is to come as close to that ideal as possible through scrutiny and attention to craft, and through the elimination of conflicts of interest where possible.
Even if the Walter Goodman's claims reflected the truth (and I would dispute his claims point by point were we not just warned to avoid politics), they would not be as important as Goodman's being called upon to defend the veracity of his story, which every reporter should be ready to do.
What is important is the accuracy of FAIR's findings and corrections, and whether their record reflects this overall, not how many hyperbolic accusations Goodman can make in the midst of his otherwise reasonable points.
Among the journalists involved in FAIR, you'll find award-winners like Nat Hentoff and Alexander Cockburn, both of whom wrote for the Village Voice for decades. You'll also find FAIR's forum, Counter-Spin (partially run by Cockburn), to be a place full of news stories and editorials that have not gained a wider audience because they don't fit in with anyone's agenda. Even I don't agree with most of it, but I do appreciate being apprised of the different conclusions to which reporters and professionals in various fields have come and which have not been heard.
Quote:
|
This is a special interest group, so their approach to journalism is the opposite of the New York Times/Washington Post.
|
The irony is that Nat Hentoff has written for the NYT. What he writes for two newspapers and one watch group do not differ in aim -- not unless the author has changed his mind.
Also: FAIR are not a "special interest group." They are not any political organization's think tank, nor are they sponsored or funded by any company or political organization requiring them to support opinions which will result in profits or profit-helpful legislation.
Like the NYT, their conclusions are based on the findings of individual reporters rather than people who are told to support a list of findings -- a fact which the NYT reporter has either omitted or failed to notice.
But to be fair to the reporter being analyzed by FAIR, I'd have to read the original article and response to get a better sense of whom to believe in that particular case. And I'm sure that FAIR has their own response to the article in which they address his claims of bias with facts like the skeptical journalists that most of them are. But to explore that area would be to entertain a subject that has now been forbidden.
Besides which, we are now two steps away from the original topic. I think we can agree that the NYT and New Yorkers in general should not be trashed for biased or unstated reasons in a thread about an article about YAB. That is uncalled for and the motivation is transparent.
But then again, some of those who now complain about being taken off-topic should not have insulted
The New York Times or New Yorkers in the first place.
We can take the rest of this discussion to the P&R forum, if you like. Send me a PM and I'll meet you there.