. . . I covered a massive anti-war demonstration in Boston. Thousands turned out from all over the state. I was overwhelmed by the anger, the unity. I realized I couldn't possibly be an impartial or disinterested journalist when it comes to things I feel strongly about. Now I wonder, should that ever have been the goal? Is the pursuit of objectivity, even as it's embodied in information gathering, noble?
As I listen to reports on the fourth anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, I feel disgusted and responsible. Why didn't we stop it? Did our pursuit of objectivity actually keep us from reporting the truth? Do American journalists automatically temper what is horrible? Does it keep us from getting to the depths of ugliness that people absolutely must see? And timeliness. Yes, hindsight is 20/20 and all that, but news journalists must have 20/20 foresight, or at least aim for it.
It's the old grief and then blame game.
I'm finding it hard to go about my business today.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment