Adrian Miles wrote:
>> this is *better* journalism than that practiced by someone at
least
>> trained in some professional practice, a code of ethics, who
(even
>> though it is dumb) at least thinks stories have 'two' sides?
>
>I thought objectivity was the significant factor in professional
>journalism (getting mulitple sources, corraboration, etc.)
yep, which is as problematic as any other value, but this is my point
(and I think Andreas makes a similar point). A videoblogger
representing racist views - how on earth is that more pure citizen
journalism or more pure journalism than someone who at least uses the
benchmark of objectivity (which we can at least meaure against).
Measurable, really?. Then let's see your numbers that indicate
the Klan's viewpoint is less than objective.
And if there's an objective story, why do you associate that with the
search for two sides instead of just one side; the actual
truth?
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
|
