╌>

Hannah-Jones: "All Journalism Is Activism"

  
Via:  Vic Eldred  •  3 years ago  •  25 comments

By:   JONATHAN TURLEY

Hannah-Jones: "All Journalism Is Activism"
We have been discussing the academic saga over the offer of an academic chair by the University of North Carolina to controversial New York Times Magazine reporter Nikole Hannah-Jones. UNC rescinded the offer but then re-extended the offer without tenure. Hannah-Jones accepted but then changed her mind and demanded tenure. UNC then gave her tenure…

Leave a comment to auto-join group We the People

We the People


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



We have been discussing the academic saga over the offer of an academic chair by the University of North Carolina to controversial New York Times Magazine reporter Nikole Hannah-Jones. UNC rescinded the offer but then re-extended the offer without tenure. Hannah-Jones accepted but then changed her mind and demanded tenure. UNC then gave her tenure and she changed her mind to took a chair at Howard University. The opposition to Hannah-Jones was based on the historical errors in her 1619 Project and criticism over biased journalism. Now Hannah-Jones is removing any doubt about her view of journalism. She has declared that "all journalism is activism."

Hannah-Jones told CBS News that journalists now have set aside notions of neutrality. She noted:

"When you look at the model of The Washington Post, right? 'Democracy dies in darkness,' that's not a neutral position. But our methods of reporting have to be objective. We have to try to be fair and accurate. And I don't know how you can be fair and accurate if you pretend publicly that you have no feelings about something that you clearly do."

Reporters are now claiming greater and greater license to frame news to illustrate the truth as they see it. They nod to the need for fairness but then note that they have to tell the truth about society and politics as they see it. They then seek to frame rather than report the news. Hannah-Jones is a great example of how this new journalism quickly becomes raw advocacy.

We have have been discussing how writers, editors, commentators, and academics have embraced rising calls for censorship and speech controls, including President-elect Joe Biden and his key advisers. Even journalists are leading attacks on free speech and the free press. Bias is now treated as something that is natural and motivating. Recently, Lauren Wolfe, the recently fired freelance editor for the New York Times, has not only gone public to defend her pro-Biden tweet but published a piece titled " I'm a Biased Journalist and I'm Okay With That ."

This movement includes academics rejecting the very concept of objectivity in journalism in favor of open advocacy. Columbia Journalism Dean and New Yorker writer Steve Coll has denounced how the First Amendment right to freedom of speech was being "weaponized" to protect disinformation. In an interview with The Stanford Daily , Stanford journalism professor, Ted Glasser, insisted that journalism needed to "free itself from this notion of objectivity to develop a sense of social justice." He rejected the notion that the journalism is based on objectivity and said that he views "journalists as activists because journalism at its best — and indeed history at its best — is all about morality." Thus, "Journalists need to be overt and candid advocates for social justice, and it's hard to do that under the constraints of objectivity."

For those of us who have worked for decades as columnists and in the media, the growing intolerance for dissenting views is stifling and alarming. Hannah-Jones has been a leading voice in attacking those with opposing views. A year ago, the New York Times denounced its own publishing of an editorial of Sen. Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) calling for the use of the troops to restore order in Washington after days of rioting around the White House. It was one of the one of the lowest points in the history of modern American journalism. While Congress would "call in the troops" six months later to quell the rioting at the Capitol on January 6th, New York Times reporters and columnists called the column historically inaccurate and politically inciteful. Reporters insisted that Cotton was even endangering them by suggesting the use of troops and insisted that the newspaper cannot feature people who advocate political violence. (One year later, the New York Times published a column by an academic who has previously declared that there is nothing wrong with murdering conservatives and Republicans).

It is thus no surprise that Hannah-Jones will now teach the same biased approach journalism to students at Howard University. What is saddening is the silence of most journalism professors as they watch their profession just become a new form of advocacy. Few want to risk the professional attacks in opposing figures like Hannah-Jones. However, this movement is killing their profession. Polls show trust in the media at an all-time low with less than 20 percent of citizens trusting television or print media. Yet, reporters and academics continue to destroy the core principles that sustain journalism and ultimately the role of a free press in our society.


05282015_66951-e1532723116454.jpg?fit=297%2C300&ssl=1
Jonathan Turley


Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Vic Eldred    3 years ago

With complete control of so many power centers, leftists feel free to admit the truth about themselves & their motives.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1.1  JBB  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 years ago

How do you truthfully describe you motivations? 

I had a running disagreement with a university English teacher who steadfastly maintained that in order for something, anything, to be considered real "art" then it must necessarily convey a message.

What message is there in Van Gogh's Sunflowers?

I get what the professor is saying but let us really be honest. A lot of what passes for "Journalism" is pure fluff! Have you seen Fox And Friends or Today?

Then you have your lousy pure D misinformation and disinformation outfits, like Newsmax and OAN...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @1.1    3 years ago
A lot of what passes for "Journalism" is pure fluff!

And a lot of it is the kind of activism that Hannah-Jones preaches. I see it in the New York Times constantly.

I found it entertaining when they get called out.

Courtesy of Tucker Carlson last night:

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.1    3 years ago

[DELETED]

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
1.1.3  JBB  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.1    3 years ago

Yes, and Alex Jones is only selling vitamins...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.4  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @1.1.3    3 years ago

Wouldn't know. Who reads him?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.2  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 years ago

What's a power center?  Something Turdley made up?

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
1.3  XXJefferson51  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 years ago

The queen of fake history has spoken!  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2  JohnRussell    3 years ago

Jonathan Turley's career as an objective commentator has been sinking like a ton of bricks for years now. 

I dont see one word in his supposedly objective look at bias in journalism about the bias in right wing and conservative media , which is if anything much worse than what the "liberal" journalists do. The seeded article is nothing but right wing advocacy. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @2    3 years ago
as an objective commentator has been sinking like a ton of bricks for years now. 

You define objective as pro-AOC?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1    3 years ago

I dont even know what that means. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.2  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.1    3 years ago

It seems that you question the objectivity of anyone who isn't hard left.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.3  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.1    3 years ago

[DELETED]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.4  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.2    3 years ago

You are hilarious. 

A lot of commentators have a point of view , left and right. 

I draw the line at people saying Trump was a great president though. Suspension of disbelief takes one only so far. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.5  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.4    3 years ago
You are hilarious. 

There's nothing like the healing power of laughter. (I believe the Joker said that)


I draw the line at people saying Trump was a great president though.

Now that gets me laughing!

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1.6  XXJefferson51  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.2    3 years ago

That’s their bottom line.  The Biden regime wants to censor conservative news and social medias. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
3  Snuffy    3 years ago

Getting back to the point of the article,  how do people feel about a journalist who isn't interested in telling the objective truth but more the truth as she defines it? And she's going to be teaching future journalists.

A few months back I made a comment about how people accept the truth as they see it and I was lambasted with several people who forcefully stated there is only the truth. Now we see what is happening to journalism right out in the open. I'm definitely gonna use her as an example of why I no longer trust any of the MSM trash.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3    3 years ago
I'm definitely gonna use her as an example of why I no longer trust any of the MSM trash.

and you think that alt right or alt left are giving you objective news? 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
3.1.1  Snuffy  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    3 years ago

I don't trust any main-stream media.  Thought that was fairly clear in my comments. 

But if you want to think of MSM not as main-stream media but shorthand for MSNBC...   I just can't help you.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.1    3 years ago

I didnt say anything about MSNBC to you. What are you talking about?

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
3.1.3  JBB  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    3 years ago

original

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
3.1.4  XXJefferson51  replied to  JBB @3.1.3    3 years ago

Fair and balanced Fox News is the most trusted name in news

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
3.1.5  Gsquared  replied to  XXJefferson51 @3.1.4    3 years ago

Fox is the leading purveyor of fake news.  That it may be the most beloved source of disinformation for Trumpists means nothing to real Americans.  If you love Putin, you will really love Fox.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
4  Snuffy    3 years ago
MSM

MSM = Main Stream Media...   that includes MSNBC,  CBS, ABC,  Fox,  all those fucking agencies that proclaim they are "news" organizations. I don't trust any news reporter.  Does this finally clear it up for you or are you still confused?

And I know you didn't say MSNBC,  that's why my line read  "  But if you want to think of MSM not as main-stream media but shorthand for MSNBC "

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
6  Buzz of the Orient    3 years ago

I can remember a time when you could trust and believe what you read, heard or saw - back in the days when an annual award was presented to the least biased medium, back in the days of Walter Cronkite, but these days this line from the seeded article is so indicative of what to expect today.....

"Reporters are now claiming greater and greater license to frame news to illustrate the truth as they see it."

What has happened, and what is true today, is that this adage in now more applicable.....

Don't believe anything you read or hear, and only half of what you see.

And even it may not go far enough in these days of photoshop and digital video editing...

 
 

Who is online

JohnRussell
Vic Eldred
Hallux
George


84 visitors