an interesting presentation of questions on how changes in media today effect the news and reporters of news. a number of reporters/editors/ bloggers are quoted and there is a balance of viewpoints on whether or not it is reasonable to be 'objective' and what that means, in reporting. some examples of how differently a report may be written from different views today might have been useful in such an abstract discussion.

The article discusses the continual erosion of objectivit6y as newspapers migrate to the Web. Some of the experts note journalism pitfalls about what passes for objectivity--quoting sources with opposite opinions; others believe fairness is more important than objectivity, calling the latter a myth. Fact is, we have too few facts in a market-driven Internet environment that segments the audience into affinity groups shaped by opinion so that any opinion is affirmed, however ludicrous. I have battled this type of lazy journalism doubletalk for decades. Objectivity may be impossible to achieve, but striving for an ever higher percentage of it keeps reporters sharp and the audience, informed.

It's great to hear different opinions in the same article. We could use more of this except for the subject, TIME.