The View from Somewhere
Undoing the Myth of Journalistic Objectivity
by Lewis Raven Wallace
This title was previously available on NetGalley and is now archived.
Send NetGalley books directly to your Kindle or Kindle app
1
To read on a Kindle or Kindle app, please add kindle@netgalley.com as an approved email address to receive files in your Amazon account. Click here for step-by-step instructions.
2
Also find your Kindle email address within your Amazon account, and enter it here.
Pub Date Oct 31 2019 | Archive Date Nov 12 2019
Talking about this book? Use #TheViewFromSomewhere #NetGalley. More hashtag tips!
Description
At its core, this is a book about fierce journalists who have pursued truth and transparency and sometimes been punished for it—not just by tyrannical governments but by journalistic institutions themselves. He highlights the stories of journalists who question “objectivity” with sensitivity and passion: Desmond Cole of the Toronto Star; New York Times reporter Linda Greenhouse; Pulitzer Prize-winner Rachel Kaadzi Ghansah; Peabody-winning podcaster John Biewen; Guardian correspondent Gary Younge; former Buzzfeed reporter Meredith Talusan; and many others. Wallace also shares his own experiences as a midwestern transgender journalist and activist who was fired from his job as a national reporter for public radio for speaking out against “objectivity” in coverage of Trump and white supremacy.
With insightful steps through history, Wallace stresses that journalists have never been mere passive observers—the choices they make reflect worldviews tinted by race, class, gender, and geography. He upholds the centrality of facts and the necessary discipline of verification but argues against the long-held standard of “objective” media coverage that asks journalists to claim they are without bias. Using historical and contemporary examples—from lynching in the nineteenth century to transgender issues in the twenty-first—Wallace offers a definitive critique of “objectivity” as a catchall for accurate journalism. He calls for the dismissal of this damaging mythology in order to confront the realities of institutional power, racism, and other forms of oppression and exploitation in the news industry.
Now more than ever, journalism that resists extractive, exploitive, and tokenistic practices toward marginalized people isn’t just important—it is essential. Combining Wallace’s intellectual and emotional journey with the wisdom of others’ experiences, The View from Somewhere is a compelling rallying cry against journalist neutrality and for the validity of news told from distinctly subjective voices.
Advance Praise
“Wallace asks the right questions and makes a powerful case for a re-examination of what journalism is and how it can best serve the public. American journalists will readily admit, I think, that our industry has let down the broader community in recent years. Wallace posits a new solution for how we might avoid the mistakes of the past and move forward in a productive way. The View from Somewhere is both a fascinating dissection of our political body and a passionate plea for reform. It's also a darn good read.”—Celeste Headlee, author of 'We Need to Talk: How to Have Conversations That Matter'
Marketing Plan
Podcast produced alongside the book.
Book tour across the US.
Podcast produced alongside the book.
Book tour across the US.
Available Editions
EDITION | Other Format |
ISBN | 9780226589176 |
PRICE | $25.00 (USD) |
PAGES | 240 |
Featured Reviews
Where do you start when writing a review of a brutally honest, soul-searching book written by a young transgender journalist who was fired from his mainstream reporting job for questioning the usefulness of the journalistic concept of “objectivity” on a personal blog? Perhaps, as the author suggests, one should start with radical transparency. Like the author, I belong to the LGBTQIA community, like the author I am white, and thus benefit from the invisible privileges accorded whites in our society due to systemic racism. Yet, at the same time, I know what it is to be marginalized as a queer woman. I understand that marriage is more than a religious institution, as some try to claim today to exclude the LGBTQIA from the institution in the name of religious freedom. I know this because marriage affects access to health insurance, tax status, and even ability to see a hospitalized life partner. These are all things that a straight person takes for granted. So, when the author questions “objectivity” and points to how claims of objectivity historically and currently have preserved the status quo, I nod my head in agreement. But I hope that those who might not agree will at least listen to his arguments with an open mind. As the author does not claim the mantle of absolute certainty, but rather advocates for an open and honest debate about how we can restore American trust in news coverage.
Historically, as the author details, “objectivity” has been used by news outlets to define what is news. It has been used to exclude certain stories as deviant, such as Ida B. Wells exposé that revealed how lynching had become an epidemic in this country and how mainstream newspapers never questioned the veracity of the rape allegations that were used to justify the killing of black men. While wells crisscrossed the country gathering statistics on lynching, mainstream newspapers such as the New York Times launched an attack on her, calling her a “slanderous, nasty-minded mulattress.” But it was her “deviant” coverage that produced the most thorough picture of lynching in her time. It was stories such as hers that exposed the lie behind the status quo and transformed it.
But as the author also shows, one need not look to the nineteenth century to find cases where objectivity was used as a weapon to maintain the status quo and ensure certain groups remain in the margins. For example, if a woman reporter writes a story about abortion, her objectivity is called into question, because she has too much personal stake in the issue, as happened to Linda Greenhouse, a journalist at the time of the story affiliated with the New York Times. But the same question is never asked of male journalists who attend private dinners with politicians or are drinking buddies with Wall Street types? In short, objectivity and the concept of “conflict of interest” become ways of ensuring certain voices remain underrepresented.
As alternative, the author suggests that journalism should prioritize skepticism and a curiosity about the systems and structures that keep oppression in place, and radical transparency to the public about the values and methodologies that inform an individual reporter’s journalistic practice. This focus does not mean abandoning all tenets of traditional journalistic ethics: verification and fact-checking, editorial independence from political parties and corporations, clarity and transparency, and deep, thorough sourcing. But it does mean, the author argues, recognizing that journalists all write from somewhere and that somewhere is what can ensure diverse voices are represented in the media.
This thought-provoking book about the way forward for journalism in a polarized environment in which white supremacy hides behind outcries over “fake news” deserves a wide readership. Not because it purports to have all the answers, but because it dares to raise fundamental questions about how news is written and what it means when certain stories are deemed not “newsworthy” for marginalized and so-called mainstream communities.
The View from Somewhere changed not only the way I look at the media and my own position within it as a freelance journalist, but the way I teach things like Cognitive Dissonance in my writing courses. I have begun telling students to read it and telling them about pieces of it when they ask questions about unbiased reporting. This is essential reading for anyone who wants to be a writer.