This is a pickle definitely. Which is more important, truth or objectivity? as journalists, we are compelled to be objective, but when it comes to the truth, would our objectivity be the barrier instead of the catalyst?
Being a Singaporean, this issue does speak volumes into the journalistic industry in Singapore. With the fast-paced society, and the censorship and oppression, its hard to find the unrefined truth of anything on the journalistic view. because of this, many Singaporeans have resorted to the on-line political dissent websites. The journalistic profession has been severely weakened, and scholars who won their scholarships can also be front-page news in Singapore. It is relatively easy for PR agencies to gain coverage via the newspapers that most PR agencies rely on the press-agentry model in Singapore, according to Sriramesh (2007).
Should either truth or objectivity be compromised? I am of the belief that if the truth has nothing to hide, then it should be the raw truth, only then can we talk about objectivity. How can we be objective if we do not have the necessary information to make an objective decision? Bill Moyers sums it up nicely when he says that objectivity is only longer possible in today's society. here is his link.
No comments:
Post a Comment