Comment: Would you concede that a

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Would you concede that a (see in situ)

Would you concede that a

Would you concede that a journalist gains credibility along with demonstrated impartiality?

Oh sure, of course (the impossibility of true impartiality on most of the issues nothwithstanding). I mean I'm not discounting the ability of the "Politics: none" approach, as Professor Rosen calls it, to convey important information or to establish credibility. There's a big market for it for a reason, and it's just a matter of preference, really. That's why I think Rosen's piece is a good read, because it credibly articulates the benefits and drawbacks of each approach. I just personally - and strongly - prefer the "Politics: some" approach because I think it's more forthright and offers the reader an ability to better judge the facts knowing the bias of the source presenting them, versus the "objective" reporter who couches his bias in euphemisms, omissions and other methods which are far more difficult to discern and therefore make judging the information presented a far more challenging affair.

Just my own opinion.