Every journalist who is not too stupid or too full of himself to notice what is going on knows that what he does is morally indefensible.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Journalism without a moral position is impossible. Every journalist is a moralist. It's absolutely unavoidable.
I do think that there are gray lines of morality in a newsroom, when it comes to some stories. The best-intentioned journalist still has a difficult mission, to try to boil down people.
Most journalists are idiots.
There's a kind of journalistic narcissism that New York-based journalists are guilty of.
The journalistic code of ethics governing the broadcasts requires that opposing views be presented, and that journalists' personal opinions or judgments be left out of factual reporting.
The things journalists should pay attention to are the issues the political leadership agrees on, rather than to their supposed antagonisms.
A journalist covering politics, most of us are aware of the necessity to try to be sure we're unbiased in our reporting. That's one of the fundamentals of good journalism.
The central dilemma in journalism is that you don't know what you don't know.
Journalists always explain that people are mad at them because they tell the truth, which is often unpleasant or uncomfortable to hear. However, they fail in situations where there is more than one truth.
As a reporter, I approach every situation knowing that everyone has his or her own agenda. It's not a bad thing; it's just a fact.