From The Fort:
From The Fort:
While this is funny to see happen to the Freep, it's also a sad statement on American journalism.
Thankfully, there will probably only be around 15-20 printed newspapers nationally in about 10 years; and the Freep will likely not be among them.
"One of the things I think newsrooms have to realize," Mr. Anger says, "is we're here to cover the news in an unvarnished way, but we're also here to facilitate commerce."
No your not. As soon as you have a another goal besides the news, you have a possible conflict of interest or a hidden agenda. If the advertisers are influencing what you write and how you write it, you have become a nice unofficial arm of that company's PR firm. In no way should your goal be to facilitate commerce, because in typical newspaper quote methods I could change that to:
"....to facilitate commerce (for our advertisers)"
To put it in the ridiculous hypothetical, what if Target Executives were caught punching dolphins? Would they report it without reservation or would they warn Target before hand with their prior relationship?
Don't read it if you're a grammar or spelling Nazi. You'd think that the Wall Street Journal would copy edit their post that skins another newspaper, but you'd be wrong...
but as long as the content of a news article is factual, I couldn't care less if it's an article based on an advertiser.
If I were a media outlet, and I had to cover the subject of a known bias, such as an alma mater or an advertiser, I'd approach it in a similar manner as Brian:
“Since I wear my bias on my sleeve I have to deploy facts and precedents and reasoning convincing enough to overcome that.”
Humana's been in the national news a lot recently and I won't politicize these boards, but I'll just say that I have a much larger issue when truth is subverted for an agenda, and leave it at that.
entirely too much credit. Let's get that whole "report the facts" thing down before we start worrying about journalistic integrity.
I do understand what you're saying and what the OP was saying, and I wasn't defending the Freep. What I will say is that a person with integrity can write about whatever subject they want. The truth is precisely and only what it is.
If someone wants to read an article and say, "This is utter BS, they're writing about an advertiser therefore it's biased" and dismiss it out of hand, that's the reader's prerogative. The truth of something is a fixed trait and not something that changes because of an inferred bias.
Imho, Brian's a good example of being able to write objectively about given topics that he's partial to. I really like his quote on a similar subject and I've used it several times myself.
so I'll just say that Humana was absolutely right and was silenced by the administration for trying to tell their subscribers the factual truth. Oops, sorry, you started it moderately and I upped it, good example of why we shouldn't on this board...
the Freep anymore because I can't trust anything they write or say as unbiased.
The Enquirer and Sun are much more reliable news sources then the Freep.
The big headline is that "Judgment Day" is going to be a week from today -- 11/9/09.
That really increases the stakes for Saturday's game. I don't want to face my Maker fresh off a loss to Purdue.
thanks for bringing this to our attention. Could they make it any more obvious?