Originally posted by Wien_Sean: As a journalist or other reporting person you are always supposed to present arguments against you, without it the reporting is not, fox says "fair and balanced." Presenting the other side would give Moore and Coulter a semblance of validity.
You just pointed out (unintentionally) the sorry state of 'journalism'. If you're just reporting a story, there should be no opinion, no need to 'present the other side'. Having said that, I don't consider Coulter a journalist. Her works (books, especially) present factual events with her own interpretation of them. So she does what most 'journalists' do today, but without the guise of 'journalism'. It gets dangerous when 'journalists' do what she does and claim they're being objective.
I draw a line between simply reporting the news and what journalists should be doing, that being accepting that they all have opinions. Journalism is not simply about reporting events but also sometimes a journalist should give an opinion. A quote I remember about the state of journalism today goes something like "if Bush came out tomorrow saying the world is flat the media would say 'Bush says world is flat, others disagree'", it's like they don't even try to think. That being said, journalist should give opinions and present both sides. It gives your argument more validity when you present counter arguments in your work rather that just giving one side.
