Reference no: EM133149238

Short answer question:

In August 2016, New York Times Mediator, Jim Rutenberg, created controversy when he suggested that journalists covering the presidential election would have to "throw out the textbook" on journalistic objectivity. "If you view a Trump presidency as something that's potentially dangerous, then your reporting is going to reflect that. You would move closer than you've ever been to being oppositional."

When this sentiment was echoed by Times's Editor, Dean Banquet, it seemed to signal a major turn in mainstream reporting. Although the rise of critical reporting on Trump was dismissed as "a malignant strain of liberal bias" by the New York Post's Michael Goodwin, Rutenberg considered it a journalistic duty. Given the role of journalism in society, with all its freedoms and responsibilities, what do you make of Rutenberg's argument? Can it be justified or not?