By Arthur Alpert
As a sophisticated consumer of journalism, you know the dangers involved when news people or institutions seek balance. Most obviously, it implies there are two sides to a story. If only the world were that simple.
And then there’s the problem of deciding what you want to balance. Years ago, when I did TV news, we joked about producing a documentary on air pollution that would be objective and balanced. We’d devote the first half to how dirty air harms living things, then use the second to show it cleaning the lungs.
You also have noticed how infrequently the Albuquerque Journal attempts balance; generally, it ignores (or covers minimally) state efforts to limit voting, the vast growth of income and wealth inequality, how the tax system aids and abets that, climate change, corporate welfare, big (and anonymous) money in politics and demonization of the poor.
And that’s just in the news columns.
So when the Journal does seek balance, I pay attention, alert for a journalistic lesson.