Battle for the soul of journalism

Neal Gabler, the token liberal on News Watch, FOXNews’ media criticism show, says the issue isn’t whether the media is liberal or conservative.

… there is a third and more disturbing possibility in which both sides have gotten it wrong. Looking at it philosophically rather than ideologically, the real media war today isn’t between liberals and conservatives but between two entirely different journalistic mind-sets: those who believe in advocacy, and those who believe in objectivity — or, at the very least, in the appearance of objectivity. And what we are witnessing is not just a political skirmish but a battle for the soul of American journalism.

Most of us take it for granted that the media should be disinterested, but for the better part of the history of American journalism, this would have been regarded as idiotic. Throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, the press was not impartial, nor was it supposed to be. Newspapers were published by political parties, or their allies, with the express purpose of advancing an agenda; news was almost always tinctured with opinion. The papers were principally targeted at the party faithful, or at potential recruits, who read them for incitement, just as listeners today tune in to Rush Limbaugh or Bill O’Reilly to stoke their political fires. Put another way, a newspaper provided ammunition, not information.

This is my problem with most Weblogs. They do not consider it their mission to inform so much as to promote their cause.