Fair and Balanced

Posted by Moonage on 27 May 2005 | Tagged as: Opinions

Roger L. Simon asks a very simple question, "What does "fair and balanced" mean anyway?".  This is a no-brainer to me, but for some reason it’s not a widely accepted definition.  "It" being "just the facts m’am."  Just give me the details, I’ll spin it, apply my own biases, and interpret it as I see fit.  That I not being me as a blogger, but me as an individual person.  It is not the obligation of bloggers to present the facts per se, it is the obligation of bloggers to present their interpretation of facts.  If a blogger sees an obvious erroneous fact presented by the "media" environment, then it becomes their obligation to say so.  Some blogs are great at presenting facts, but that is not the real definition of a "web log".  When someone is making the claim they are "fair and balanced", that implies, to me, they are just going to present the facts on both sides of an argument.

And that’s all I want.

Technorati Tags:

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply

Related Posts

  • Daily Kos bias?
  • Nancy Pelosi Condemns Rangel for dissing Mississippi
  • Politicizing Katrina
  • Miller Beer promotes gay bondage?
  • The Consequences of pork barrel spending?
  • Increasing Minimum Wage
  • Are we more racist or sexist?
  • Media Lied, People Died
  • Joe Lieberman on FEMA
  • Pelosi’s kindler, gentler leadership - Boxer style
  • Scumbag “reporting”
  • CNN, all Obama, all the time
  • Mary Cheney and Robert Novak
  • Fitzgeral Popularity at 18%
  • Fair Tax proposal
  • Spinning Iraq, Part 3
  • When sex isn’t sex, but other things are?
  • Tom Delay, paybacks are a beoch
  • Polarization of the US, Part III
  • The battle for Newark, NJ
  • « Newsweek FUBAR, Epilogue

    Ceci Connelly and the 100 Murders »