Objective Truth, Post-Modernism, and Modern Journalism
by David Z. Dent
Hugh Hewitt just
posted on the topic of the Columbia School of Journalism and the inevitibility of MSM decline. A thought occurred to me while reading all of the various links;
Post-modernist, secular humanists, of the sort that inhabit CSJ and most of the country's newsrooms have a philosophical barrier to their very mantra of objectivity. Post-modernism doesn't believe in objective truth, it believes in "my truth" vs. "your truth". How can an aspiring reporter with a coastal post-modern bent even state the line about objectivity with a straight face?
I found an interesting quote from one of
Hewitt's conversations with a current CSJ student;
Wallace is a native of Baltimore who left his job as the manager of the
classifieds at the San Francisco Guardian, an alternative weekly, to hone the
skills that he hopes will take him to a daily to do local political reporting.
The 1999 graduate of Kenyon College had done a little campus radio before
heading off to tend bar in Alaska. In San Francisco he got hooked on city hall
gossip, and though he was no fan of Mayor Willie Brown, or of "corporate power
allied with politicians" generally, he's certain he'll be able to bring fairness
to his future job as a political reporter. When I trot out my list of
"parameter" questions I use to test for basic ideological disposition--Wallace
doesn't own a gun; he favors same-sex marriage--there are no surprises.
My contention is that these people have an agenda and bring it with them into the profession. And by doing so, bring "their" truth, because they don't believe in a "The" truth, and the truth might as well be one that they are allied with. It is called propaganda. This Wallace character believes fairness is defined as having "his" truth aired as prominently as possible at the expense of the other truths that he deems less worthy. Wallace is the problem and eventual assassin of the MSM.
A friend of mine dated a journalism major in college and her goal and reason for entering the profession was to "influence the world". Why would someone committed to "objective" journalism state that as their reason for entering the profession?
Silly MSM, truth is for those who believe it exists...and those willing to work hard enough to find it.
