Instability of journalistic objectivity: The future of the code is in asking how not how much
Citation
Petrovic, Jelena (2008). Instability of journalistic objectivity : The future of the code is in asking how not how much . In Proceedings: 4th Annual Symposium: Graduate Research and Scholarly Projects. Wichita, KS: Wichita State University, p.19-20
Abstract
American press both praises and stumbles upon
objectivity. This study tries to close this gap by providing
communication professionals and academia with a
definition that understands objectivity, not as a set of stable
standards, but as a collection of flexible practices
journalists used to maintain their power in society.
Additionally, its findings also offer guidelines for a training
of the future journalists. Development of objectivity in
American journalism identifies three elements of the
phenomena: balanced representation of all sides, fairness of
the representation, and factuality. History confirms that
none of those elements were applied consistently. This
study asks in what ways today’s mainstream journalists
practice objectivity? The research used content analysis of
123 articles from the Wichita Eagle that covered
gubernatorial elections from 1994 to 2006. The codebook
tested all three practices: balance, fairness, and factuality.
The analysis attempts to show that journalists are
inconsistent in applying objectivity, usually don’t separate
their opinion from facts, and still try to proportionally
represent all sides of an issue.
Description
Paper presented to the 4th Annual Symposium on Graduate Research and Scholarly Projects (GRASP) held at the Hughes Metropolitan Complex, Wichita State University, April 25, 2008.
Research completed at the Elliott School of Communication, Fairmount College of Liberal Arts and Sciences