[Trapped Behind Enemy Lines]

The late David Brinkley, George Clintonopolous’s predecessor on ABC, seemed to me like the epitome of what an unbiased journalist should be like.

Would be nice if we had more people in the media like David Brinkley. I never knew what his personal leanings were.

And that’s the way it should be.

[arasina]

He's going to ask Republicans the sorts of questions they should be asked...

But he's NOT going to ask Democrats the sorts of questions THEY should be asked.

[EQAndyBuzz]

I would like to see liberals debate on Fox News with Kelly, Wallace and Greta as mods.

Now that’s television.

[KarlInOhio]

Completely unbiased? No, that's impossible unless the reporter just doesn't care about the topic. I could be unbiased about British Premiere League soccer. But each reporter should be able to honestly look at himself and consider how his biases affect his reporting and correct those errors. I think the media generally fails at that.

How could someone give tens of thousands of dollars to the family he used to work for and pretend that he isn't their kept pet? How could anyone write adoringly about the crease in a man's pants and pretend to be neutral?

[BitWielder1]

I don't expect perfect non bias but they could at least try not to be blatant propaganda mouthpieces.
Investigators, and presumably investigating journalists, know there are at least two sides to every story.
You don't know the whole story if you only have one side.
It would be much more respectful to viewers if they gave us a complete picture of what was known at the time.
Basic honesty would go a long way to restore viewers and ratings.

[Attention Surplus Disorder]

There’s no such thing as perfect human beings either. So therefore, we ought to feel justified stealing whatever we can, beating the crap out of other people, leaving our crap on the ground, having sex with whatever things or people or animals we happen to fancy at any particular moment, and basically living in a lawless jungle where there is no morality nor concern for other people.

Honestly, do these people claim to have functioning brains?

[Bratch]

Stephanopoulos is a partisan by the purest definition of the word.

He's not just partisan, he's an activist.

He consciously works to undermine Republicans while protecting Democrats. Any pundit that isn't aware of that is living in a fantasy world.

[SandRat]

REMEMBER

That a correspondent for the New York Tribune
who reported on politics in Europe during the
U.S. Civil war later bacame
infamous not as a newspaperman but as
the father of modern communism

--------------

Karl Marx.

[RIghtwardHo]

Bingo.

[Steve_Seattle]

Among mainstream journalists, it is an article of faith that they are completely objective and without bias, and that the only biased network is Fox News. Do we need any more proof that they are dangerously insane?

[NormsRevenge]

They should force news presenters to wear armbands that reflect their personal convictions.. Agendas.. Uhhh.. Yaknow

Or sumthin’.

Over to you, Steppinoutonus!!

[IronJack]

I've heard this excuse for the last half a century. Here's the rebuttal:

No, journalists cannot completely divorce their own personal biases from the stories they cover. And even if they could, the reporters aren't the only people who decide what gets covered, how, and what gets published. Fine. I accept that.

But FACTS admit of no bias. If I write a leed that says

"Two teenage girls were struck and killed Sunday near the Overprice Mall by a driver later identified as Salvador Illegales of Juarez, Mexico. Police are withholding the names of the victims pending notification of their families."

that is a factual who-what-when-where-why leed.

If instead the leed reads

"Two privileged white girls darted in front of an automobile driven by a respected member of the Mexican-American community and were struck despite his best efforts. The girls, who had reportedly been in ill health, later succumbed to injuries."

it is clear that the second leed disposes the reader in favor of the driver and casts doubt on the actions of the girls.

My point is that the first leed -- all facts -- tells a story. The second leed -- replete with vague innuendos, emotionally charged terms, and subjective pronouncements -- casts a bias onto the events. One is an example of good journalism. One is an example of today's journalism. Can you guess which is which?

Give us facts. Keep your biases to yourself. And quit hiding behind flimsy excuses for your cowardly and unprofessional behavior.

[GOPJ]

Fire all ‘journalist’ and let the government hire goon rewrite men to gussie up press releases.

If we’re going to stop pretending let’s do it right... why pay the liars?