Objective journalism does not exist.Even the most objective journalists who write balanced articles make a choice between all available news.
That is not to say that there is no qualitative difference between, for example, the latest news and the time (in Belgium).There are certainly quality newspapers.
The most important thing seems to be consulted on different sources.If you read an earlier ‘ right-hand ‘ newspaper, you should also check out a more ‘ leftist ‘ newspaper (e.g. the morning in Belgium).
As Ben Baert says: “Objective news does not exist”.The news that we now know from the United States clearly shows that objectivity is culturally determined. For example, for the average Trump follower, the most news that does not come from Fox is ‘ fake ‘ news, as for Trump’s opponents all the news that produced is not to be trusted by Fox and similar peers. The fact that a majority of the media has an equal sound does not mean that this sound is the right one. For the American invasion of Iraq, we were given the image of mass destruction weapons by the Mainstreem media. Only a small group showed a different image. However, most news consumers have considered the sound of the Mainstreem media to be objective and therefore correct.
Even though one does its utmost to be as objective as possible, one can achieve the contrary.For instance, NU.nl recently announced that responses to Nujij denying climate change will be removed.This is because such reactions according to NU.nl fall under the driving of untruths.
The site also published an article on climate change which further cited the fact that a large majority of climate scientists agree on global warming.However, by indicating earlier that a counter-sound will be censored, NU.nl has lost its objectivity through bias, even if the article is correct.This shows that even correct news does not have to be objective.
That is very limited.In particular, investigative journalism still captivates me. And the whole world has seen in recent years what a dangerous profession it is, to want to tell people the truth.
For the rest, you can be sure that political pressure is also exerted on the media.For example, BV. Almost every newspaper used to be a political colour.
Fortunately, these days have long passed, but it is still clear (in Flanders) how the relations between politics and media lie.For example, BV. David David do not give an interview to the newspaper De Morgen, because the newspaper is too Krtitisch for the right in general and often personally the Weaver would tackle.
So you want real objective news, etc., it still exists but you have to look forward to it
For objective journalism is likewise a journalism needed that the other one controlteaches.In a small country like the Netherlands, where every journalist digs his own career RAF if he/she would exercise this control, that is indeed very difficult. But who says that journalism should be objective? Indeed, it must not spread untruths. If they do so, there will, as a rule, be disadvantaged parties who will invoke the court. But a journalism that draws a right-wing or left-wing political movement through the mud, which is rarely objective, MIET is also possible in a country with empowered and educated citizens. Furthermore, it is always Pam not only to sail on national journalism, but also to take note of sources from the surrounding countries, where of course the knowledge of the local languages is needed, English is definitively not an unjust.