We all know that the true job of straight reporters is to scold Democrats for ambition, echo hysterical fears about the deficit, and call for "comity" whenever anyone pushes back too hard against fascists.
"Objective" news reporting is defined not by a lack of assumptions or biases, but by a refusal to acknowledge those assumptions & biases. The kind of reporting Haberman & other US political journos do rests on a giant superstructure of unexamined presumptions.
Digging those presumptions up, examining & interrogating them, FEELS like "opinion journalism" to people trained in that milieu. But it's a meaningless dividing line. Why is an unexamined presumption any more "objective" or "neutral" than one consciously chosen?
You can follow @drvox.
Tip: mention @threader_app on a Twitter thread with the keyword “compile” to get a link to it.
Enjoy Threader? Sign up.
Threader is an independent project created by only two developers. The site gets 500,000+ visits a month and our iOS Twitter client was featured as an App of the Day by Apple. Running this space is expensive and time consuming. If you find Threader useful, please consider supporting us to make it a sustainable project.