Objective Journalism???

Last week I received a phone call from a writer with a national magazine. She had been assigned to write an article about the exodus to the "exurbs" (the suburbs of the suburbs for those of you who live in the wide open spaces). In places like southern California, New York City, and Chicago, those who want to purchase an affordable home are moving waaaaay out and commuting an hour or more each way to work. Many of exurbanites are young families.

Now those of us who are trained in rational thought and good research methods would surmise the phenomonem is probably caused by the lack of affordable housing closer to the city or perhaps by the desire for homeownership despite the toll on personal time and the added stress. But not our friends at the magazine, oh no. They decided the cause is that women are desperate to get married and are therefore jumping into marriage at a younger age and producing all these young families that need an affordable place to live.

The reporter had been assigned that topic and she was looking for statistics to back up the theory. We talked for about 10 minutes about the realities and statistics of those who are getting married (yes, it is still often older, educated couples, ranging from mid-20s to early 30s). When I told the reporter she might have to change the premise of her story, she said she couldn't. She had to write about the assigned topic and she had to in some way find data to back up the premise.

If you or I did that, we would be accused of manipulating the facts to fit the story, so how can the so called "established" media do such a thing? The reporter certainly didn't gain any credibility with me and I now know that what her magazine reports is definitely not the objective truth. Now I wonder how many other magazines do the same thing in the name of selling copies.