ethics

RECENT POSTS

Four takes on a poll: a case study in the use of voice

How you express yourself has implications for how users react.

In yesterday’s Argo webinar on voice, opinion and objectivity, we discussed several blog posts, asking two main questions:

  1. Where does the post fall on a scale from “straight” (written in a non-controversial, just-the-facts style) to “assertive” (clearly making or assuming an argument)?
  2. What effects might that choice have on users’ reactions to the post?

We kicked off the discussion by examining four approaches to the same story.

On Tuesday, Bloomberg released the results of a poll of likely voters in this November’s midterm elections. Posts about polls are almost perfect for our purposes, because it’s possible to read so much into them. There’s no “objective” reading of a poll – there are the banner top-line findings, then all sorts of murky findings that are subject to vastly varying interpretations. Any of the findings you choose to emphasize can reveal your particular biases, preferences, and interests. Here are four different treatments, along with my analysis of their effects: Continue reading

Voice, opinion and objectivity: An Argo webinar

I had a nuanced conversation today with the Argo bloggers and NPR’s Mark Memmott about the effects of different ways of couching perspectives and information. I’m posting the slides and a teensy bit of summary here now, with more context to come later.

Quick summary: I opened the conversation by saying that I didn’t intend to use the word “objectivity” much in relation to the conversation. To the extent I use the term, I talk about it as an ideal applied to a method, rather than to particular material. (I wouldn’t say a particular post is “objective,” but I might say a journalist pursued information in a rigorous, objective fashion.) I’ve taken inspiration on this point from Rosenstiel and Kovach’s Elements of Journalism, which clarified the distinction:

The call for journalists to adopt objectivity was an appeal for them to develop a consistent method of testing information – a transparent approach to evidence – precisely so that personal and cultural biases would not undermine the accuracy of their work.

Continue reading

The objectivity reading list: 5 takes on perspective in journalism

"Objectivity" by Sol LeWitt

As Joel alluded to on Friday, one of the most interesting digressions in our day-long workshop for the West Coast Argo-bloggers last week was our discussion of the doctrines of objectivity. This has been a long, ongoing conversation with room for plenty of nuance, and I hope we can advance that conversation a bit here.

Joel linked to a thoughtful post by Ed Yong asking whether science journalists should take sides. I want to pull together a quick reading list that I think might provoke some good thoughts: Continue reading

The wit & wisdom of Marc Ambinder

I found out this week that the Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder is leaving to head up the White House reporting team at National Journal. I haven’t given Ambinder much love on this blog yet, but he employs several techniques I think any blogger could really learn from. More on that later. For now, I wanted to pass along five of his posts on journalism – with a special focus on bias, perspective and analysis – that I thought were particularly valuable: Continue reading