Undoing The Myth Of Journalistic Objectivity Summary

When covering stories with sensitive information and vulnerable sources, how can journalists avoid practicing extractive journalism while balancing their duty to seek truth and report it? With the ongoing debate about objectivity, the sustainability and ethics of journalism are now more relevant than ever. In a world where journalists increasingly cover the stories of vulnerable populations (displaced Palestinians and Israelis, unhoused people, sexual violence survivors, victims of gentrification, trans individuals, mass shooting survivors, etc. We must prioritize the question of how––rather, if––reporters can avoid practicing extractive journalism. In Chapter 11 of The View From Somewhere: Undoing the Myth of Journalistic Objectivity, Lewis Raven Wallace explores the issue of extractive journalism and details his struggles in avoiding such

For him, “the outside observer objectifies the people and places the stories are about, who become ‘sources’ rather than human beings” (Wallace 199). Books like Mr. Wallace’s highlight the importance of the discussion about extractive journalism. With young and/or marginalized journalists questioning the integral value of objectivity, the dilemma of whether journalists can avoid extractive journalism signifies that we must re-evaluate journalism fundamentals for the sake of sources, audiences and reporters. I have also outlined three potential sources. Natalie Yahr is the author of a guide published by the University of Wisconsin-Madison on practices journalists can employ to practice less extractive journalism. Given Yahr’s expertise in avoiding extractive journalism (she authored a guide on it and investigations with sensitive information), I believe her expertise would add much more depth and credibility to the article. Ms. Yahr can be reached at [e-mail]. Freelance journalist Namupa Shivute authored a piece for the Unbias