Actually, I'm a journalist myself. I used to work in media industry as a reporter and news presenter. But at the moment, I'm doing my masters in journalism at Westminster University in England. It's here that I really started to doubt objectivity in my career.
From my experience in journalism, journalists must be neutral when presenting news. They've got to observe, nose about, seek the truth and report it to the world with their "naked eyes." They've got to be free from their personal judgement.
But the journalism I witness everyday seems nothing close to objectivity. The "naked eyes" aren't just the naked eyes; they belong to somebody.
Theories say journalists report the truth. But how? First of all, they perceive the truth. Secondly, they interpret what they've seen. And last of all, they narrate what they've understood. So where is objectivity in this process? Is the truth still the truth after all?
Personally, I haven't got a Scooby Doo!
As far as I'm concerned, however, objectivity is impossible. News reports come from journalists' perception. And their perception is formed by their personal qualities and standards. Every single word they use in their report is determined by their own judgement. Basically, it's their view that matters.
Let's have a look at something people call "journalistic" then tell me if I'm wrong in this case.
On October 13, a day after the Members of Parliament were startled by Sir Thomas Legg's retrospective decision, The Independent's front page shouted "They're all in it together."
(This picture is taken by Pichayada Promchertchoo on October 20, 2009 )Above the headline, you could see three pictures of Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg, with short description just below their faces, saying...
"BROWN TOLD TO REPAY £12,415 FOR CLEANING AND GARDENING;
CAMERON MUST PROVIDE MORE DETAILS ON MORTGAGE CLAIMS;
CLEGG ORDERED TO PAY BACK £910 OF GARDENING BILL"
On the same day, The Sun also played the expenses issue on its front page, with two pictures: one of the "busted" PM and the other one of a "dusted" window.
(This picture is taken by Pichayada Promchertchoo on October 20, 2009 )What a humiliation for the three leaders! PM Gordon Brown, head of the government, has been "told" to repay £12,415 for cleaning and gardening! If only the newspapers could giggle, I bet you would hear their chuckles of mockery. These gentlemen deserve it, don't they?
Still, does that reflect objectivity in journalism? These newspapers' stance on the issue is pretty obvious, although they are not supposed to add any slightest idea of their personal judgement to the report.
Although the MPs' claims are highly embarrassing and unbelievably ridiculous, their actions were then regarded as "legitimate" somehow. Moreover, it was the Commons Fees Office at that time that gave its green light to all the claims. But where are they on the front pages? And what about the retrospective actions? Why doesn't it get as much attention as the expenses scandal?
I'm not a pro-politicians person, mind you. These little details about the MPs are just one example of the missing "objectivity" and the truth that is reported through someone's "naked eyes."
Certainly, we can't deny the truth is there. But whether it is treated impartially, that's the question you've got to answer yourself.
