Dear Coach,

I find that many reporters, both in print and TV, put opinion into their stories. One story will say Jones “fell and broke a bone” while another will say he “skipped along.” The reader is left to determine the truth.

You also see this on TV with two pundits facing off.

Is this the future of journalism? Fragmented truth, where people get news from some journalists who see the world one way and others who see it another way?

Or is there a place for objective truth, devoid of opinion?

If so, what are some tips for writing with that “objective truth?” — Truth-seeker

Dear Truth,

You’ve hit on a big one. Philosophers and scholars through the ages have debated, argued, opined, looked at every facet of the question What is Truth?

The truth is (at least in my view) there is no so-called objective truth. Listen to a rabid Republican argue with a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat, or a Catholic argue with a Born Again, and you’ll see. Whose “truth” is “right”?

If truth were a thing that just walked in the door and sat down, there would be no need for juries to weigh evidence or judges to pronounce sentences. We would just know the truth. Trial over.

Journalism is different, though. The example you describe above (skipping versus breaking a bone) sounds like one of the reporters had too much liquid lunch. I would call that bad reporting, not interpreting the truth. What journalism aims to do – and it’s always an aim – is to tell the news fairly, accurately, contextually, which leads toward truth (FACT). It cannot be a fact that the man both fell and broke a bone, and skipped down the street. One story was inaccurate.

If you stick to verifiable facts (either he fell and broke a bone, or he skipped); if you are fair (did you see him? If not, who did? How many saw him? Any disparities in what they saw? Records? All sides of the story?); and if you add context (was he wearing flip-flops, army boots, running shoes?), then you will write a sound story.

Can you be 100 percent “objective?” No, not unless you are a computer. What we decide to put in a lead is not objective. We hope it is fair, accurate, contextual and truthful. Which quotes we choose, whether we put the mother in the second graf or save her until the end – all that is subjective. Can it also be fair? Yes. Accurate? Sure. Contextual? Yep. And as close to truth as we can make it.

Follow the advice above and you will be fine. Forget the pundits. They are pundits, not news reporters.

And remember the words of the French intellectual Andre Gide: “Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it.”

Share