Leslie and I just finished watching The Newsroom. We had recently completed The West Wing so jumping to another Sorkin show was appealing. For the uninitiated, it is the story of a cable news show that decides to revamp their production away from sensational news and toward pertinent information for the electorate disseminated in a court room style with expert witnesses.
Of course it was good writing and the dialogue was often fantastic. (It was particularly interesting to watch an attempt of a solid liberal to write a convincing Republican). But the most compelling part of the show was the characters' desire to produce honest news.
There were numerous examples of different producers not wanting to push a story until they had it solidly confirmed despite having ratings pressure. There was on-screen concern for the language or time given to a particular point or part of the story that could be interpreted in the wrong way. The final episode had a scene in the "digital department" with a rant against titles that are deceiving but make you click or content that is entertaining but useless.
I am such a proponent of that desire to clearly and decisively illuminate truth in a way that helps people. Because of my view of truth, being an ambassador of the ultimate good news, I hold heralds of truth to a very high standard. When one is given the responsibility to consistently give me the news I expect a reverence for that responsibility and a high level of integrity. It is that person's job to tell me what is happening, aside from their commentary, in a clear, honest, and judicious way.
I understand that no one can remain entirely unbiased but it is laudable when someone makes a consistent effort to not lean into their bias or lean away from undesirable truth when working to clearly report. I find myself having to be aware of this when I preach. I have to lean into the truth of the text and not use words, tone or hand gestures that would give improper emphasis to a particular part of Scripture. Often I realize I can use a soft tone with a hard truth and it will be taken more easily but blunt the sharpness of the text. I can use a dismissive gesture when talking about a controversial truth. This can position myself for approval but will not shepherd the people that have been put in my care.
I look out for the way headlines are written and notice unneeded and qualifying adjectives, all bending the reader or listener toward a desired conclusion. It is especially disheartening to see this happen with friends that read on "their side" and fall prey to headlines and stories that 1) are more opinion than reality 2)align with preconceived opinions 3) bolster previous opinions to the point that they are unwilling to listen to reason or opposing arguments.
The respect I have for honest and judicious reporting has reached the point where I actively avoid those that are doing a poor job (even if I tend to agree with the headline) and have begun to pay, via subscription, for those that are doing a good job. It costs money to do that kind of reporting and I see it as a worthwhile investment.
Those who faithfully investigate, observe and report truth ought to be praised and supported far and above those who entice you into your preferred opinion.
In other words, I prefer my editorial in the back of the paper not on the front page.