National Public Radio [recently] crossed the Rubicon on ethics and announced that its reporters will now be allowed to participate in protests.
We also recently discussed the firing of Lauren Wolfe, who was fired for saying that she had “chills” in watching Biden land at Andrews Air Force base. Wolfe later penned a column declaring “I’m a Biased Journalist and I’m Okay With That” — a full-throated endorsement of the new journalistic model of open bias and advocacy.
We now have actual journalism deans writing to reporters for them to be advocates to protect the subjects of news stories. The move is consistent with the writing of Stanford journalism professor Ted Glasser who insists that journalism needed to “free itself from this notion of objectivity to develop a sense of social justice.”
Moving on from reporting:
He rejected the notion that the journalism is based on objectivity and said that he views “journalists as activists because journalism at its best — and indeed history at its best — is all about morality.” Thus, “Journalists need to be overt and candid advocates for social justice, and it’s hard to do that under the constraints of objectivity.”
How far can you kick a journalist?
The question is who will be left to “protect” journalism. The abandonment of the tradition of neutrality for reporters will hasten the decline of American journalism. Polls show trust in the media at an all-time low with less than 20 percent of citizens trusting television or print media. Yet, reporters and academics continue to destroy the core principles that sustain journalism and ultimately the role of a free press in our society.