Though normally I would not use Vox as the crux an an argument--other than to bring light to issues larger "more traditional" media might not cover--this specific video actually touches on a complex topic us in the journalism industry don't often discuss: the aging of our standard practices.
I don't believe in a perfect balance between subjective and objective journalism. I strongly believe that both forms deserve a place in any respectable readers diet, and using subjective and objective writing in conjunction with each other in an article can take your writing from good to great. There's no such things as unbiased writing. You, as a writer, can try to create something as objectively as possible, but by doing so you lose the draw of subjective writing, your work becomes boring, and people won't read and talk about it? Have you ever read a phonebook? No, I didn't think so.
Subjective writing, of course, can make your work entertaining and the life of any social event, but by being overtly subjective your writing loses its intended purpose. By taking away the neutrality of information and influxing it with your own opinion beyond a standard injection of personality, you're not letting people grow from your work. It's like sending somebody A Van Gogh through iMessage. It's still the same piece of art, but without physicality and the uniqueness of seeing it in person it loses its meaning--This was not the perfect analogy.
The greatest writers are those who know how to balance subjectivity with objectivity, allowing readers to experience the news as naturally as possible, while still guiding them along. They must guide their reader not towards an opinion, but in the contexts of other news.
Normalcy bias is a problem in modern American media,--as much as I hate to agree with Vox--and as journalists it's our duty to help America's digest the news as accurately and in context as possible. Maybe it's time to stop teaching pure objectivity, and start teaching how to mix raw information with how we perceive our lives? This is unprecedented or The last time this happened, [insert context].
Journalism as an industry and profession is at an unprecedented crossroads in modern history. What will media become in this age of mass communication and gatekeeping? Where will the funding required to tell a good story come from? Some might even call it broken. Maybe we'll have to keep on breaking everything to find a way to fix it?
Subscribe to Streamed
Get the latest posts delivered right to your inbox