House of Burgess

Pssst.
I’m probably not supposed to be telling you this, but come closer and I’ll let you in on something. Ready? Here goes:
Journalists have opinions about the subject they write about.
I know, I know. There is no opinion is journalism. Just like there is no ‘i’ in team or crying in baseball. But look, newspapers, from the top down are produced by people. And real life human beings form beliefs based on situations they are exposed to.
Even the most sanitized, balanced writer is bound to let some of their real-life prejudice towards one side or the other slip once in a while. That goes for the choice of words to the amount of attention a particular aspect of a story is given.
Gonzo journalists like Chuck Klosterman (“Killing Yourself to Live”), Hunter S. Thompson (“Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas”) and Tom Wolfe (“ The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test”) realized this, threw their opinions into their writing and jumped in after them. These writers are my heroes, but the main problem I have with their genre is often head-scratching blurring of the lines between fiction and reality. Dream sequences, invented characters and exaggerated descriptions can often occur and can make trying to suss out what is real and what isn’t challenging.
This leads me to my new obsession, the Showtime series “Penn & Teller: B.S.” (READ: the name is not actually ‘B.S.’). The show is hosted by magicians/comedians Penn Jillette and Teller and each half-hour long episode covers a topic they are set on debunking.
The show is far from unbiased and I don’t always agree with the position the hosts take. What I do love about though is that the facts and opposing viewpoints surrounding each topic are presented just as often as their wholly separate opinions. I enjoy the fact that the duo assumes I’ll be able to figure out the difference between their opinion and fact and moves on.
“(‘B.S.’) isn't journalism, exactly,” wrote Noel Murray in his 2004 review of the show for satirical newspaper “The Onion”. “The show is one-sided by design: P&T's field interviewers rarely confront their subjects with the evidence against them, preferring to let the crackpots ramble on so that Jillette's voiceover rejoinders can score points without inciting a real argument.”
I don’t have a problem with that though. What I do have a problem with is the “truthiness” that has overtaken the new breed of loud, talking-head news programs.
“I don't trust books,” said comedian Stephen Colbert, originator of the word, in 2005. “They're all fact, no heart. And that's exactly what's pulling our country apart today. We are divided between those who think with their head, and those who know with their heart.”
People like Bill O’Reilly insert their opinion into their reporting too, but they go one step further by distorting and taking out of context the facts they present as well, giving the whole operation an air of truthiness. (I could name some examples, but your best bet is to turn to the Fox News Channel right now. I’m sure they’re doing it as we speak.)
Really what’s worse: someone who tells you up front that they have an opinion or someone who pretends to be “fair and balanced” while feeding you a lie?