Welcome to SPJ Blogs Sign in | Join | Help

Speaking too much of one's mind

Is it OK for a technology reporter in San Jose to call for the mayor of Oakland to resign? (http://www.eastbayexpress.com/2007-10-10/news/a-misdirected-missive/full) Does such a campaign cross from impartiality, a fundamental for reporters, to advocacy? It sure seems so to me. I agree with The New York Times' anti-activism approach. I won't argue that reporters are robots and have no personal feelings, but they certainly shouldn't have public opinions while they're journalists, whether the issues are on their beat or not. We make a difference by pursuing truths, through our journalism, not by taking sides and lobbying.
Published Monday, October 15, 2007 4:12 AM by AndySchotz

Comments

# re: Speaking too much of one's mind

Monday, October 15, 2007 2:28 AM by V Smoothe
I don't see how the two are fundamentally at odds with one another. So long as the public expression of opinion is not contained within a journalist's so-called impartial writing, why does it matter?

# re: Speaking too much of one's mind

Tuesday, October 16, 2007 2:35 AM by Andy Schotz
It matters because your reputation is colored by more than just what you write. If you march in a fathers' rights parade, then cover a custody battle, is it reasonable for a reader to question your impartiality? I think so. That doesn't mean that you necessarily were biased in your reporting. However, the perception of what you might or might not do is every bit as crucial as the reality. I am less likely to trust a reporter whose displeasure with a politician cannot be kept in check, even if it's outside her coverage area. Neutrality is not a role to be played in one place, then shed somewhere else. That's just my three cents (I write long).
Anonymous comments are disabled. Please log in or create an account to comment on this article.