Objectivity, Neutrality, and Values in the Press

            In the past, the press has tried to objective. Objectivity is not passive, but involves accountability and justice. That means telling the truth to their consumers and speaking truth to power. However, the press should not be neutral. If the press tried to be neutral by telling the Democrat and Republican side equally, then their consumers would be left confused by the two different accounts. If one politician from one party lets a pandemic decimate their state or country, objectivity doesn’t mandate that we portray their actions in neutral terms, but that we hold them, their words, and their actions accountable. If one politician says or does something inappropriate, then we should hold them accountable and tell the truth, not tell both sides, not tell the aggressor and victim's side equally.

The press should also not be value neutral. Value neutrality involves refusing to take a stand on a moral issue between two sides. For example, on the January 6^th insurrection of 2021, a value neutral headline would be, “People Storm Capitol.” This headline is factually correct, but refuses to take a stand between the insurrectionists, who were trying to stop the transfer of power, and the politicians who were trying to carry out their constitutional duty to complete the transfer of power from one president to the next. A better headline might be, “Rioters Invade Capitol,” or, “Insurrection at the Capitol.” Portraying vaccine skepticism, or even anti-vaccine opinions, in the media while medical professionals know the safety and efficacy of vaccines, would be another way to be value neutral. If the press is so afraid to pick a side, or of the image of being seen to support one side, that they are neutral, then they pick the side of the oppressor, the liar, the insurrectionist.