The WSJ Will Not Abandon Objectivity
Gerard Baker, the editor in chief of the Wall Street Journal, told his reporters the paper wouldn’t abandon objectivity while covering President Trump. If they wanted to be more oppositional, then they should look for a job elsewhere.
“It’s a little irritating when I read that we have been soft on Donald Trump,” said Baker. Originally, they had planned to have a casual meeting, but the newsroom has turned into disorder over the Trump coverage.
One source told Politico the coverage was “neutral to the point of being absurd.”
Loaded Language Geared To Hurt Trump
The criticism increased when Baker sent out a memo to the entire staff asking for reporters and editors to tone down the “loaded” language for Trump’s immigration ban over the past few weeks.
Baker defended the coverage within the meeting by reading some of their past headlines. When compared to The New York Times, for example, Baker believes they have abandoned their standards of fair reporting.
The Wall Street Journal wants to stay fair and objective.
Reporting To Reflect Views
For all of those reporters who want to lean into Trump, the editor told them to look for another place to work. According to the Daily Caller, some journalists have criticized the idea of trying to be fair towards Trump, or Hillary Clinton.
In order to justify the new unbalanced reporting, Jim Rutenberg of the New York Times said this was the new “norm” of objectivity. “If you view a Trump presidency as something that’s potentially dangerous, then your reporting is going to reflect that,” wrote Rutenberg.
In addition, he believes, “You would move closer than you’ve ever been to being oppositional. That’s uncomfortable and uncharted territory for every mainstream, non-opinion journalist I’ve ever known, and by normal standards, untenable.”
How can anyone defend not trying to be fair towards the news?
Now watch this…