We have been following the recent Nothwestern Chronicle discussion on balanced journalism, in which a media student considered such an approach “trope”.

The student who crtiqued that statement, Charles Rollet, responds to comments he has received:

My previous article about pro-same-sex marriage bias in an allegedly “non-advocacy” Medill project got many reactions. I thank the NC Equal Media blog’s authors and the Medill Equal Media Project’s director for taking the time to write civil responses to my article.

(Read the NC Equal Media Project’s responses here and here, and the Equal Media Project’s response here.)

Though I encourage readers to read all of these reactions, I maintain my original point. Mainly, that the project is not “non-advocacy” since it specifically endorses gay marriage. Observe:

In her response to my piece, one of NC Equal Media’s authors writes:

“We’re not here to advocate for marriage equality, or employment non-discrimination, or hate crime laws.”

Yet in the Equal Media Project’s website, as I previously noted, both authors casually remark:

“Although presidential support for marriage equality is a big step forward, states across the country have, like North Carolina, taken several steps back.”

There is a very clear contradiction between those two quotes. And I don’t think the second one can be explained away by claiming that it was taken out of context, or that “no journalists are apolitical” (and therefore bias is justified?), etc.

Again, the question is not whether gay marriage is a good or a bad thing for society. That is for voters, not journalists, to decide. The question is whether this sort of writing is objective. It is not.

Camille Beredjick is the editor-in-chief of the Medill Equal Media Project, the parent organization of the NC Equal Media Project. When the group was established, Beredjick specifically cited this as a goal: “To produce fair and accurate journalism that paints the full picture of what’s happening.” In her response to Rollet, she wrote:

Most importantly, sensitivity means refusing to portray antagonistic bullies as legitimate players in a discussion on civil rights. In our reporting, we’ve met plenty of individuals who object to marriage equality for any number of reasons: faith, upbringing or political persuasion, for instance. We don’t plan to label these people “hateful bigots and extremists,” as Mr. Rollet anticipates.

NC Equal Media project used the derogatory term “homophobe” in the post that Rollet critiqued.