6 ms·

I think what the link is saying is that, people are inherently biased, and to try to pretend otherwise is "potentially harmful," because you still inject your o

I think what the link is saying is that, people are inherently biased, and to try to pretend otherwise is "potentially harmful," because you still inject your own views in biases into a topic, while pretending that you don't. It's a nice quote to pull out of context though.

seneca 5y ago
> I think what the link is saying is that, people are inherently biased, and to try to pretend otherwise is "potentially harmful," because you still inject your own views in biases into a topic, while pretending that you don't. This is a common talking point of the advocacy crowd. The problem is that, as used, it's a non-sequitur. Sure, human beings have inherent bias. The answer to that is, and always has been, to strive for objectivity as best we can even though we are flawed. The advocacy crowd instead takes it as an excuse to throw objectivity out entirely and double down on their own bias.
- matthewdgreen 5y ago
  The link you cited and attributed to "the state run media company" wasn't actually from any current representative of the state-run media company. It was from a professor at a University who had formerly been a journalist. (ETA: meant to reply to the previous post by "trutannus", sorry!)
  - seneca 5y ago
    I believe you're replying to the wrong post and poster.
  - trutannus 5y ago
    I'm not sure why you have state run media in scare-quotes. CBC is state owned and run: https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/vision/mandate https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/vision/mandate "the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, as the national public broadcaster" Further: Minister Responsible: Steven Guilbeault, Minister of Canadian Heritage, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Broadcasting_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Broadcasting_Corporat...
    - matthewdgreen 5y ago
      I wasn't using scare quotes, I was using literal quotes from your previous post. You said "This is the same state-run media company that said objectivity is 'potentially harmful'", but your link points to a University professor who doesn't represent CBC or any state-run media company as best I can see.
      - trutannus 5y ago
        Maybe do some further research then, she is a former CBC reporter: "Prior to her academic work, Candis produced, wrote, and reported for television, the Internet, and radio in Canada (CBC, CTV)" Source: https://jwam.ubc.ca/profile/candis-callison/ https://jwam.ubc.ca/profile/candis-callison/ Also from the same article: "However, Candis Callison calls objectivity "the view from nowhere" and considers it potentially harmful. She has worked as a journalist in the United States and Canada for television, the internet and radio, including at the CBC."
        matthewdgreen 5y ago
        I'm a university professor who used to work at AT&T. I hold all sorts of positions, but that doesn't mean you should attribute them to "a major US telecommunications firm."
        trutannus 5y ago
        I'd agree unless AT&T published your remarks in their publications, yes. Do you really think there is no connection between what op-eds get approved for publication, and the organization publishing them? Do you also think that former employees being published in their former employer's news publication does not indicate some level of ideological aliment? I think that it does. If you don't, that's fine, but the conclusion I've come to is not unreasonable when you consider all the context.
SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
It's a bad quote even in context! If you were in a trial, and the judge said "you all should know that I'm biased and it's harmful to pretend otherwise", would you expect to get a fair hearing?
trutannus 5y ago
Except it's not. They're trying to redefine what the point of journalism is. They want to add interpretation as a goal. If you read deeper into the article, you see this: "There's a limit to how much you can put yourself in, but when you begin to think in terms of your place in society, what your relative privilege is, what social orders have benefited you and where they have not benefited you, I think this is where you're thinking about a news story. [It] shouldn't just be about a news story as an event, but how it's an intersection of systems and structures." To me, this isn't what the news is about. This is option and interpretation. News should report facts, not try to apply social theory to interpret them for me. I'm not quote mining like you suggest. The context of the article does not make it any better. Further: "It's been a very interesting few weeks on social media. And especially on Twitter, where you have Indigenous journalists and Black journalists talking about what's happened to them in the newsroom. Those kinds of narratives really illustrate the ways in which journalism is absolutely a work of interpretation, and recognizing journalism as contributing to a social order is a first step in seeing it as a tool that might do good in the world." This is even more alarming. They're essentially saying the news is by its nature an interpretation of events and can't be otherwise. This is false. There are plenty of news sources which report short, concise segments of information without interpretation (ie: Reuters).
- switchbak 5y ago
  That pretty much sums up what's happened to the CBC as of late. A far left activist organization, pretending to deliver news, funded by the state. It's a real shame, given that the CBC used to be quite a respectable organization, and would work hard to represent perspectives from all over Canada (given the constraints of the time). I'm ostensibly in the group they're pandering to, but I just can't tolerate the obvious agenda setting. I can't imagine what the more conservative Canadians must think about it. Rex Murphy (a former CBC reporter) doesn't have much good to say about his old organization.
  - p_j_w 5y ago
    >A far left activist organization If you think the CBC is "far left," then you don't actually know what "far left" really is. CBC is, at most, left of center. I'm open to having my mind changed if you can provide, for example, an instance of the CBC advocating workers seizing the means of production.
refurb 5y ago
That is some crazy woke bullshit that tries to redefine what objectivity means. ” One of the great books this year on journalism is by Desmond Cole, talking about his experience working at The Toronto Star, what it is to be a Black journalist and how it is that objectivity props up white supremacy.” The claim is that objectivity is impossible thus not worthy of pursuit and one should instead examine ones “location” to use your biases for good. This is typical CBC pap. If it’s not being discussed in the elite “progressive” circles of Toronto it’s not news.

seneca 5y ago

> I think what the link is saying is that, people are inherently biased, and to try to pretend otherwise is "potentially harmful," because you still inject your own views in biases into a topic, while pretending that you don't. This is a common talking point of the advocacy crowd. The problem is that, as used, it's a non-sequitur. Sure, human beings have inherent bias. The answer to that is, and always has been, to strive for objectivity as best we can even though we are flawed. The advocacy crowd instead takes it as an excuse to throw objectivity out entirely and double down on their own bias.

matthewdgreen 5y ago
The link you cited and attributed to "the state run media company" wasn't actually from any current representative of the state-run media company. It was from a professor at a University who had formerly been a journalist. (ETA: meant to reply to the previous post by "trutannus", sorry!)
- seneca 5y ago
  I believe you're replying to the wrong post and poster.
- trutannus 5y ago
  I'm not sure why you have state run media in scare-quotes. CBC is state owned and run: https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/vision/mandate https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/vision/mandate "the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, as the national public broadcaster" Further: Minister Responsible: Steven Guilbeault, Minister of Canadian Heritage, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Broadcasting_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Broadcasting_Corporat...
  - matthewdgreen 5y ago
    I wasn't using scare quotes, I was using literal quotes from your previous post. You said "This is the same state-run media company that said objectivity is 'potentially harmful'", but your link points to a University professor who doesn't represent CBC or any state-run media company as best I can see.
    - trutannus 5y ago
      Maybe do some further research then, she is a former CBC reporter: "Prior to her academic work, Candis produced, wrote, and reported for television, the Internet, and radio in Canada (CBC, CTV)" Source: https://jwam.ubc.ca/profile/candis-callison/ https://jwam.ubc.ca/profile/candis-callison/ Also from the same article: "However, Candis Callison calls objectivity "the view from nowhere" and considers it potentially harmful. She has worked as a journalist in the United States and Canada for television, the internet and radio, including at the CBC."
      - matthewdgreen 5y ago
        I'm a university professor who used to work at AT&T. I hold all sorts of positions, but that doesn't mean you should attribute them to "a major US telecommunications firm."
        trutannus 5y ago
        I'd agree unless AT&T published your remarks in their publications, yes. Do you really think there is no connection between what op-eds get approved for publication, and the organization publishing them? Do you also think that former employees being published in their former employer's news publication does not indicate some level of ideological aliment? I think that it does. If you don't, that's fine, but the conclusion I've come to is not unreasonable when you consider all the context.

SpicyLemonZest 5y ago

It's a bad quote even in context! If you were in a trial, and the judge said "you all should know that I'm biased and it's harmful to pretend otherwise", would you expect to get a fair hearing?

trutannus 5y ago

Except it's not. They're trying to redefine what the point of journalism is. They want to add interpretation as a goal. If you read deeper into the article, you see this: "There's a limit to how much you can put yourself in, but when you begin to think in terms of your place in society, what your relative privilege is, what social orders have benefited you and where they have not benefited you, I think this is where you're thinking about a news story. [It] shouldn't just be about a news story as an event, but how it's an intersection of systems and structures." To me, this isn't what the news is about. This is option and interpretation. News should report facts, not try to apply social theory to interpret them for me. I'm not quote mining like you suggest. The context of the article does not make it any better. Further: "It's been a very interesting few weeks on social media. And especially on Twitter, where you have Indigenous journalists and Black journalists talking about what's happened to them in the newsroom. Those kinds of narratives really illustrate the ways in which journalism is absolutely a work of interpretation, and recognizing journalism as contributing to a social order is a first step in seeing it as a tool that might do good in the world." This is even more alarming. They're essentially saying the news is by its nature an interpretation of events and can't be otherwise. This is false. There are plenty of news sources which report short, concise segments of information without interpretation (ie: Reuters).

switchbak 5y ago
That pretty much sums up what's happened to the CBC as of late. A far left activist organization, pretending to deliver news, funded by the state. It's a real shame, given that the CBC used to be quite a respectable organization, and would work hard to represent perspectives from all over Canada (given the constraints of the time). I'm ostensibly in the group they're pandering to, but I just can't tolerate the obvious agenda setting. I can't imagine what the more conservative Canadians must think about it. Rex Murphy (a former CBC reporter) doesn't have much good to say about his old organization.
- p_j_w 5y ago
  >A far left activist organization If you think the CBC is "far left," then you don't actually know what "far left" really is. CBC is, at most, left of center. I'm open to having my mind changed if you can provide, for example, an instance of the CBC advocating workers seizing the means of production.

refurb 5y ago

That is some crazy woke bullshit that tries to redefine what objectivity means. ” One of the great books this year on journalism is by Desmond Cole, talking about his experience working at The Toronto Star, what it is to be a Black journalist and how it is that objectivity props up white supremacy.” The claim is that objectivity is impossible thus not worthy of pursuit and one should instead examine ones “location” to use your biases for good. This is typical CBC pap. If it’s not being discussed in the elite “progressive” circles of Toronto it’s not news.