Journalistic objectivity is NOT impossible

Presenter: Aloa Alota, PhD candidate in Media Studies (Western University).

All are welcome to attend.

Part of the 2024/25 Mediations Lecture Series.

Attend in-person: FNB 4130
Attend online: Zoom link

Abstract: This is a reflection on an enduring debate in journalism studies involving three interrelated, commonly made arguments, namely: (i) journalism is not objective (ii) journalism cannot be objective and (iii) journalism should not be bjective. Drawing on theory and practice, I argue to the contrary that journalistic objectivity is possible. The impossibility of journalistic objectivity thesis emphasizes a particular conception of journalism that entails the relationship between the audience and a news report rather than the relationship between an event and its journalistic report. The former is the idealist approach, while the former is the realist approach. Consequently, there tends to be such an infinitely extensive range of perspectives or interpretations of a news report as there are audience members that journalistic objectivity seems impossible. The impossibility thesis also conflates (or even confuses) epistemic objectivity – ways of knowing objectivity - with the conventional understanding of objectivity that places a premium on observable and verifiable facts as a way of making sense of social reality. Drawing on my dissertation research on the actions of journalists during Nigeria’s 1993 election crisis, where journalists self-consciously stepped away from objectivity in pursuit of democratization, suggests that objectivity, understood as a practice, is possible.