The Progressive: 'bosses at MSNBC worship "objective" journalism. There is no such thing ....'

[Better Believe It]

Bring Olbermann Back: Hosts Are Citizens, Too!
By Matthew Rothschild
Editor of The Progressive
November 5, 2010


The bosses over at MSNBC have blundered badly by suspending Keith Olbermann indefinitely, without pay, for contributing to Democratic candidates. And they’ve done so because they worship the false idol of “objective” journalism.

There is no such thing as “objective” journalism. Every journalist carries along his or her own set of beliefs, biases, likes and dislikes. It’s actually unhealthy for society when journalists and their bosses pretend otherwise or try to mask these preferences. And it’s grossly unfair to the journalists to strip them of their citizenship rights.

And it’s one thing for the journalist on a particular beat to be prohibited from contributing to candidates or causes that might color their work, though full disclosure should resolve that problem.

But it’s another thing entirely when the host is already a partisan, as Keith Olbermann is. He wasn’t pulling anything over on anyone by contributing money to candidates he likes. And his check was far less valuable to those candidates than the positive coverage he gives them on his show. So whom is MSNBC fooling here?

MSNBC should bring Olbermann back now.

Read the full article at:

http://progressive.org/wx110510.html

[Odin2005]

1. fact-checking is far more important than trying to portray a false objectively.

[EFerrari]

2. If they worship journalism, they wouldn't be running infomercials

for the prison industry.

[SidDithers]

3. Unrec...nt

Sid

[Drale]

4. The closest thing to "objective journalism"

that we can in the whole world, is the BBC. Every news organization in this country swings one way of the other, with most swinging right.

[walldude]

6. +1... I have been posting about the BBC

since I went to Europe a few months ago. I had no idea how bad the news had gotten here until I had something to compare it to. Within 2 hours of watching the BBC I had seen stories about protests in China, about Tibet, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Korea, the US.. I saw the goddamn news for the first time in years, now I use their website to get the news. I don't watch any TV news anymore, it's all slanted bullshit, including Olbermann, Shultz and Maddow. Sure they are slanted to my way of thinking but slanted none the less.

Jon Stewart was right.

[mwooldri]

7. Of course I'm biased... but yes IMNSHO Auntie Beeb gets it.

It didn't matter that an anchor of the main morning show on BBC Radio 4 - essential listening for the political elite - was a paid up member of the Labour Party. You can't just join a party in the UK by signing an electoral card and say that you're Republican, Democratic or whatever. You have to pony up cash to join a political party.

It didn't stop that anchor though from giving people from any political party a tough time at the 8:10 interview...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. "Objective" journalism would limit itself to who, what, when, where, and leave out the why.

Which would be convenient for those who don't like anyone questioning what they do.

[blondeatlast]

8. Agreed; there's no doubt he's partisan and in this day of FAUX we need that "balance"

so what's the big deal?

"Balanced" and "objective" are NOT the same thing, corporate media.

k/r