One thought on “What does an “impartial” version of the news even look like? And will people want it?”

1. The issue that sprang immediately to mind is context; rarely does anything happen in a tidy box.

   For example, it’s easy enough to write a story about the aftermath of the Salisbury chemical weapon attack that includes both that Boris Johnson stated Russia were behind it without having evidence, and that Russian statements have been contradictory; but to form an unbiased opinion on whether each of those is a mistake or deliberate, one also needs a history of other contentious statements, and information on how likely contradiction is to be concealment rather than confusion for the sake of it, and so forth.

   So, I can’t imagine how long an impartial report on racial tensions in the US would have to be.

   Reply ↓