Journalists do not like to report on uncertainties. They would almost rather be wrong than ambiguous.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Uncertainty's not good for anybody.
As a reporter you tend to seek coherence from your subject or your source - it all needs to add up and make sense. In truth, in reality, there's often a great deal of murkiness and muddiness, confusion and contradiction.
Things said to a reporter in confidence should be kept in confidence.
Uncertainty is a very good thing: it's the beginning of an investigation, and the investigation should never end.
There's a certain kind of scepticism that can't bear uncertainty.
Journalists, who are skeptical to begin with, simply do not like to be lied to or made fools of.
There will be very few occasions when you are absolutely certain about anything. You will consistently be called upon to make decisions with limited information. That being the case, your goal should not be to eliminate uncertainty. Instead, you must develop the art of being clear in the face of uncertainty.
We journalists are never so idiotic as when we analyze things that we shouldn't be analyzing.
The thing that bothers me about journalism is the false equivalency we sometimes place on certain issues.
Journalists are supposed to be skeptical, that's what keeps them digging rather than simply accepting the official line, whether it comes from government or corporate bureaucrats.