page 9 of 18
journalists as “participant observers”. It has, of course, to be admitted that journal-
ism – by drawing from theory of measurement – changes what it observes in every
single observation. Since journalists do not usually participate in fighting, the use of
the term “participant observer”, with regard to its meaning in scientific methodol-
ogy, is certainly not adequate. In Ethnomethodology, participant observers are used
in experimental research to stimulate particular responses among individuals under
observation.
According to Martin Bell, “objective journalism removes any sort of moral
content from the story and leaves only an empty spectacle” (McLaughlin 2002: 155).
This view is supported by Theodore L. Glasser’s (1992: 176) repeatedly expressed
criticism on the notion of objectivity in journalism which, according to him, under-
mines the foundation of a “responsible press”:
Objective reporting has stripped reporters of their creativity and their imagination; it
has robbed journalists of their passion and their perspective. Objective reporting has
transformed journalism into something more technical than intellectual; it has turned
the art of story-telling into the technique of report writing. And most unfortunate of
all, objective reporting has denied journalists their citizenship; as disinterested ob-
servers, as impartial reporters, journalists are expected to be morally disengaged and
politically inactive. (Glasser 1992: 181)
Bell’s assumption that objectivity and neutrality would transform journalists into
literally unfeeling creatures cannot be accepted without objection. It simply over-
looks the fact that war correspondents can, of course, have personal emotions, in-
terests and prejudices without allowing them to influence the result of their professional
activities. For Stephen J. Ward (1998: 121-2), Bell’s narrow conception of objectivity
degrades objective reporters to “epistemological eunuchs”.
Interpretations assuming that journalistic objectivity goes along with a loss of
“passion” and “courage” have, therefore, to be countered with a concept of “me-
thodical objectivity” which requires journalists to subject their reports to objective
controls such as the careful presentation of facts, reliable and varied sources, expert
opinion, supporting documentation, accurate quotations, and a fair representation of
major viewpoints (Ward 1998: 122). “Those who think this cannot be done are, to
my mind, guilty of overstating the impossibility of truth and objectivity.” (Baggini
2003)
Julian Baggini (2003), editor of The Philosophers Magazine criticized that
many actors in the debate over truth and objectivity in journalism “slide too easily
from a healthy scepticism about the possibility of knowing the truth and full objec-
tivity to a defeatist form of relativism”. Of course, we need to be sophisticated about
objectivity and truth, but journalists ought to make sure that their reporting is not
clouded by particular perspectives.
Convention