Talk:Contextual objectivity

Accurate references
Can "Slate" really be considered an accurate reference?

Although the Washington Post is considered credible, being a newspaper of record, does its "witty", "editorial", and self-proclaimed "commentary" internet-circulated counterpart, funded by advertising revenues, count as a credible source? Wikipedia is not the venue for unproven opinions to be expressed as fact.

I submit the recommendation that the reference be removed and the article be rewritten, if need be, or otherwise improved to reflect objectivity and the subject matter. I will remove the reference and make a note to view the talk page, in the edit comments. If the page is reverted, hopefully someone will stumble upon this discussion.

As per slate website:

Slate is a daily magazine on the Web. Founded in 1996, we are a general-interest publication offering analysis and commentary about politics, news, and culture. Slate's strong editorial voice and witty take on current events have been recognized with numerous awards, including the National Magazine Award for General Excellence Online. The site, which is owned by The Washington Post Company, does not charge for access and is supported by advertising revenues. 96.240.167.180 (talk) 05:48, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

physics?
Someone please explain how quantum mechanics applies to journalism. Like here. GcT (talk) 06:18, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I couldn't help much here. --Joujyuze (talk) 15:44, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Contextual objectivity. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120211102357/http://www.tbsjournal.com/Archives/Fall02/Iskandar.html to http://www.tbsjournal.com/Archives/Fall02/Iskandar.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:41, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

The articles doesn't explain anything
It just seems to be a contrived way of saying "Not very accurate hot take reporting". I still do not know, what is the concept of Contextual objectivity. I would say the article should be deleted, but it is linked as by the Al Jazeera article. Also I can't find anywhere about "contextual objectivity".

Searching on web, it links me back to Wikipedia, a little about Al Jazeera. It's just a coinage. None of the sources define it and the best explanation directly from him is...."which means that different networks have to appeal to their target audiences." El Harawy coining the word, did not explain it. It does not seem to have been used a lot more. It seems like a proto-neologism that never stuck.

"which means that different networks have to appeal to their target audiences."

From reading the different vague sources, basically contextual objecity, is a claimed subjectivity, contradicting another's claimed subjecivity. "War of liberation" vs "War of occupation".

--Joujyuze (talk) 15:59, 26 December 2021 (UTC)