Last Updated on August 13, 2019
A guest on CNN’s “Reliable Sources” claims that journalists must abandon all pretense of objectivity, and instead make assertions then look for evidence to support them to further the mainstream media’s attempt to destroy President Donald Trump and his administration.
Julia Angwin, the Editor-in-Chief for The Markup, appeared on “Reliable Sources” to explain why journalists must abandon all pretense of journalistic objectivity and instead chase a narrative, saying that “The thing is journalists have all started to understand that this idea of objectivity that we were raised to follow is not working.”
She added that aiming for objectivity is “leading to false equivalence, where you just sort of repeat a lie that was stated.”
Angwin then said that she believes journalists are “looking for a new guiding light, I personally think that we should use science. Have a hypothesis, like ‘is what this president said true’, and then give the reader some analysis about that.”
The CNN host then attempts to clarify, saying that “A hypothesis as in, umm, this assertion we believe and then the facts back it up?”
He added, “Because that would be an inversion of what journalism is usually supposed to do, which is follow the facts and then a conclusion based on that.”
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) August 11, 2019
This is accurate — it is typically the job of the journalist to lay out information as it appears with minimum editorial content — not to tell the reader how to think and then provide information supporting that position.
Angwin, however, agrees with the idea that the media is supposed to tell the audience how to think.
“Yeah, I mean it’s sort of two different ways of looking at it.”
She then went on to credit The New York Times for its work to discredit President Trump through its publication, celebrating that the newspaper now feels comfortable calling the president a liar.
“I think a really good example of it is actually The New York Times, when they put a list together of every lie that Trump had done and said for two years in 2017,” she went on, “And after that I think they felt comfortable, and anyone would feel comfortable, saying this is a man who repeatedly and unabashedly lies all the time, and then that hypothesis is fully proven.”
On Twitter, multiple journalists and media personalities simply wondered when the media supposedly represented the facts from an unbiased point of view.
“When did they try it”, wondered Ron Coleman, a popular First Amendment lawyer.
When did they try it
— Ron Coleman (@RonColeman) August 12, 2019
“The solution is objective reporting,” wrote another Twitter user. “Leave it to progressives to turn everything on its head.”
The solution is objective reporting. What isn't working is the lack of objectivity. Leave it to Progressives to turn everything on its head. The problem is the solution and the solution is the problem.
— Nick Carroll (@LibertyAndTech) August 11, 2019
Yet another added, “No wonder why the public doesn’t trust them.”
And they wonder why the public doesn’t trust them.
— Dr. John Doe, JD, MBA, Esq. (@XtamerlaneX) August 12, 2019