- Have any questions?
- [email protected]
- Home
- Championing objectivity in writing—and, more precisely, decrying solipsism, narcissism, and self-absorption—can, of course, have legitimate uses.
Question 1:
Championing objectivity in writing—and, more precisely, decrying solipsism, narcissism, and self-absorption—can, of course, have legitimate uses. In the era of Twitter and Facebook, when we are given an infinite supply of blank fields to fill with our thoughts, we are all encouraged to think we are more interesting than we actually are. And yet there is a compelling argument to be made, more generally, that journalism’s putative standards of objectivity are sometimes wielded to check not subjectivity, per se, but unwanted subjectivities. The method of testing information – the approach to evidence- is meant to be objective, not the journalist. The key is in the discipline of the craft, not the aim.Which of the following is the writer least likely to agree with?
A. By not taking sides in an argument a journalist can strive to be objective, a worthwhile aspiration even if it is not perfectly achieved.
B. Objective journalism is not one that is without bias, but one in which bias has to stand up to evidence and results.
C. All journalism has a point of view and a set of interests it advances.
D. Objectivity in writing is about making the story more than just about the writer.
These questions are from this test. Would you like to take a practice test?