Kristine,

I believe Journalism, itself, is the problem and that the most surprising thing is that in its current incarnation it has lasted as long as it has -- about a century. Here in the States, our journalism was invented by a man named Walter Lippmann who viewed it as a science, and introduced such terms as “objectivity” and “verification” as if it could deliver singular truths. He launched these ideas in a book called “Liberty and the News,” and these ideas stuck. But he wrote a second book only two years later called “Public Opinion” in which he reversed himself, concluding that truth was a job for historians, not for the working environment of reporters. He wrote, “[News] is like the beam of a searchlight that moves restlessly about, bringing one episode and then another out of darkness into vision.”

So, how does one “objectively” point a searchlight? What agreed-to formula is there for determining the one correct way to point it for the items that are most newsworthy or engage readers the most? This is at the heart of the reason I believe objectivity is both impossible and undesirable. The value and professionalism of a journalist will evolve to become someone with a knack for pointing that searchlight based upon the preferences of specific, like-minded audiences, often adding opinion to fill-in the implications and unknowns. And personally, I think that is a wonderful, democratic development.