>Objective implies neutrality, but the facts aren't neutral. No, I don't think this is true. "Truth" may not be neutral, depending on who your favorite philos

>Objective implies neutrality, but the facts aren't neutral. No, I don't think this is true. "Truth" may not be neutral, depending on who your favorite philosopher is, but facts are neutral. Yes, journalists need to adapt to a reality where information isn't scarce, but throwing away all semblance of objectivity is exactly the wrong way to do it. That doesn't mean they just report what people say (which is more laziness than any attempt at objectivity). It means they dig into political scandals for both parties in an evenhanded manner. If as a consumer of news I can't trust them to report the facts, they are entirely unfit for purpose.