Biased Objectivity: An Experiment on Information Preferences of Journalists and Citizens

Mothes, Cornelia

doi:10.1177/1077699016669106

Cited by 27 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 64 publications

(97 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The ‘Canons of Journalism’, adopted by the American Society of Newspaper Editors in 1923, included basic ideas of journalistic ethics that today can be found in many journalistic codes of conduct (Fengler et al, 2014). One common element in many countries is a journalist’s responsibility to report objectively on events (Figdor, 2010; Hampton, 2008; Mothes, 2016; Post, 2014). The adherence to the ethical codes might depend on different factors including the professional socialization of journalists (Frith and Meech, 2007; Reinardy and Moore, 2007), the organization of work within the editorial board (Esser, 1998) and the implementation of codes of ethics within a newspaper (Anderson, 1987; Morin and Giles, 1986).…”

Section: Ethical Standards and Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

Borderline journalism: Why do journalists accept and justify questionable practices that establish scandals? A quantitative survey

Kepplinger

Viererbl

2018

Journalism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The shift from descriptive reporting toward an interpretive style of journalism can be regarded as one factor to explain the rising number of reported scandals in Western democracies. While most of these critical reports are based on actual misbehaviors, there are scandals triggered by violations of journalistic norms. This article examines the question of how many journalists accept such violations of norms and what arguments they use to justify them. To answer these questions, we conducted a quantitative online survey among German journalists in June and July 2015. Participants were confronted with descriptions of factual violations of the German press codex that triggered major scandals. For each case, the journalists rated the acceptability of the questionable practice and gave their opinion on arguments for and against the violation. The majority considers the violations of norms as unacceptable and rejects arguments defending them. Nevertheless, some journalists express opposing views. The acceptance of norm violations is linked to agreement with two arguments. First, defenders of the violations claim to have a privileged insight of the story. Second, they refuse to accept responsibility for readers and the protagonists of the misleadingly reported scandals.

show abstract

Section: Ethical Standards and Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

Borderline journalism: Why do journalists accept and justify questionable practices that establish scandals? A quantitative survey

Kepplinger

Viererbl

2018

Journalism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The nine others thought that their perspective and language use inevitably make a difference. They adhered to what Cornelia Mothes (2016) calls ‘biased objectivity’, objectivity influenced by individual mind-sets. Some of the doubtful nine, mainly Sven, literally refused objectivity by claiming that it ‘doesn’t exist’.…”

Section: Analysis: When the Crisis Comes Homementioning

confidence: 91%

When the crisis comes home: Emotions, professionalism, and reporting on 22 March in Belgian journalists’ narratives

Kotišová

2017

Journalism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On the morning of 22 March 2016, three coordinated suicide bombings planned by Daesh occurred in Brussels. Those Belgian reporters who commonly travel to conflict zones and disaster sites had to report on a ‘combat zone event’ that was happening at the place where they, their families, and friends lived. Their subjective experience of witnesses, actors, and even indirect victims merged with their professional tasks. The traditional journalistic commitment to objectivity – that is, detachment, impartiality, fairness, or professional distance – that remains to be a cornerstone of journalists’ professional self-perception and an assumed source of their authority, was challenged. The article seeks to explore the aftermath of the unprecedentedly close terrorist attacks among Belgian journalists. Based on in-depth, narrative interviews with 10 Belgian ‘crisis reporters’, the article addresses the following questions: In which sense did the reporters experience the attacks as different from other crises? How did they deal with the unusually complex relationship between their personal and professional identities? What form(s) of objectivity did they employ and (how) did their work on emotional boundaries interfere with such a norm? The findings show that the radical, ‘surreal’ alteration of the reporters’ lifeworld resulted in a fundamental conflict between personal and professional identities. In turn, their rupture but inseparability helped to shape the objectivity-as-a-practice employed by the journalists on and after 22 March.

show abstract

“…Bedeutsam erscheint aber, dass Objektivitätsansprüche sowohl im Publikum als auch in den Redaktionen verbreitet sind und die Verwirklichung dieser Ansprüche als wichtiges, wenngleich schwierig zu operationalisierendes Kriterium für die Qualität der Medien gefasst werden kann -auch und gerade dann, wenn sich in der Praxis der Berichterstattung diverse Defizite zeigen (vgl. Arnold 2009;Post 2013;Mothes 2017;Krüger und Mundt 2020).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Der Reporter-Blick von nirgendwo?

Schultz

2020

Publizistik

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ZusammenfassungIn der Medienforschung gibt es eine reiche Tradition der Kritik am Objektivitätsideal. Journalistische Beiträge können sich demnach nie ganz von subjektiven Einflüssen lösen. Der Aufsatz verändert die Perspektive, indem er zeigt, inwiefern subjektive Darstellungsformen ihrerseits nicht frei von Objektivitätsansprüchen sind. Als Hintergrund dient die Philosophie Thomas Nagels, der mit dem „Blick von nirgendwo“ ein prägendes Bild für die Objektivitätsidee geliefert hat. Eine eher kursorische Rezeption in der Journalismusforschung konnte dazu verleiten, dieses Bild als Inbegriff eines überzogenen oder naiven Postulats zu missdeuten. Nagels Ansatz eröffnet jedoch Möglichkeiten, Vorstellungen von Objektivität und Subjektivität zu versöhnen. Der Aufsatz skizziert Nagels Philosophie und erörtert darauf aufbauend das Verhältnis von Objektivität und Subjektivität in journalistischen Kommentaren und Reportagen. Wie zuletzt auch die Relotius-Affäre gezeigt hat, werden an Reportagen Objektivitätsansprüche gestellt, die nicht im Widerspruch zu einer subjektiven Erzählperspektive stehen, sondern mit dieser verschränkt sind. Wie der Aufsatz argumentiert, greifen subjektive und objektive Perspektiven im Journalismus grundsätzlich ineinander. So zehrt die Subjektivität der Reportage von der Objektivität, mit der sie äußere und innere Tatsachen schildert, und die Subjektivität des Kommentars von dem Anspruch der Objektivität, mit dem er u. a. moralische Urteile fällt.

show abstract

Biased Objectivity: An Experiment on Information Preferences of Journalists and Citizens

Cited by 27 publications

References 64 publications

Borderline journalism: Why do journalists accept and justify questionable practices that establish scandals? A quantitative survey

Borderline journalism: Why do journalists accept and justify questionable practices that establish scandals? A quantitative survey

When the crisis comes home: Emotions, professionalism, and reporting on 22 March in Belgian journalists’ narratives

Der Reporter-Blick von nirgendwo?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About