This is our truth, tell us yours
There’s a central dilemma at the heart of any debate about media ethics.
Bluntly, it’s similar to the debate that goes on in sex work circles about who is or isn’t a sex worker.
What constitutes a journalist?
I’m not a journalist. I’m a blogger. WYSIWYG. It’s my opinions, and my efforts to use evidence are nothing more than a commitment to respect the reader.
Now think about, say, the Daily Mail and its attack on Ralph Miliband’s reputation. What exactly distinguished that from blogging? Was there a commitment to something called journalism that is any different to blogging, or boring your mates in the pub?
Nick Cohen, in the Spectator, made a savage attack on Mehdi Hassan this weekend, calling him a hypocrite. In fact all Hassan has done is what journalists do, changing sidees as the tide changes.
Until journalists are willing to have the debate in public about the difference beetween opinion and journalism, and stop giving a platform to untrained hacks who couldn’t get a job as speechwriters for their political friends the curse of ATL trolling like the Mail’s attack on Rlph Miliband’s reputation will continue to harm the reputation of journalism. It’s a question of ethics, and a fundamental rule that journalists need to enforce on their colleagues – opinion without evidence is not journalism.