ABSTRACT
Philosophy, like journalism, is concerned with truth, but journalists (in the Anglosphere at least) are befuddled by the notion, and perceive a dichotomy between their practical approach and philosophy’s theoretical musings. Indeed, they can believe, in practice, that the news is no synonym for the truth, and that epistemology, per se, is not their concern. But the nature of knowledge raises unavoidable questions, if only because claims regarding the correspondence between what occurred in the world and journalism’s representations of it are vitally important to considering the ‘honoured’ status some seek for the profession. ‘Truth’ – whatever that may be – is essential to the branding of the news in the marketplace of ideas. So, given the anxieties ‘truth’ provokes, other terms come to be substituted for it as journalism’s essential requirement: impartiality, balance, objectivity, fairness, etc. But these (especially ‘objectivity’) are just as contentious, and, on the ground, impractical. Befuddlement is an unavoidable by-product whatever the term deployed. Today (as ever), the everyday realities of producing and distributing news render the goal of ‘objectivity’ every bit as tricky as promising ‘truth’. An essentially academic debate now has some – including some professional journalists – denying that objectivity was ever itself an objective.
