The O'Reily Factor: Can We Escape Subjective Journalism?

Can journalism be truly unbiased? What appears to be bias is in some cases thorough reporting and it is often difficult to discern the difference. Journalism must be almost anthropological in nature; observation without participation and strict adherence to the facts. It requires not only the journalist but also the institution that employees him to be unbiased and objective. But, is it possible? I would suggest that it is not possible for any person, journalist or otherwise, to be 100% unbiased on any subject. However, there is a journalistic obligation to attempt objectivity in every situation.

The issue of showing graphic images to a national audience is a tricky subject. It can be particularly emotional for viewers when the images in question are of dead or wounded soldiers during wartime. But, everyone knows that soldiers die during war. It is not the idea that is offensive but the images themselves; this suggests a society that is apathetic towards the pursuit of truth. When America goes to war, the people literally pay for it. If the public supports a war with their tax dollars then they are not only entitled, but beholden to see every aspect of that war.

It is difficult to maintain journalistic integrity when the power of a journalistic institution is too centralized. An excellent example is the controversial Fox News Network. In the 2000 Presidential Election Fox news was the first to report George W. Bush as the winner based solely on the decision of one man, Roger Ailes. Rupert Murdoch holds complete creative control over the media conglomerate and his personal conservative bias influences all aspects of the network. A division of power within a network is necessary to create an environment that encourages balanced reporting.

Al-Jezeera is not exempt from the plague of propaganda. Donald Rumsfeld very publicly accused the Arab network of concocting inflammatory editorials and using women and children to make false claims about military events. Their decision to show American P.O.W.'s and dead U.S. soldiers was reviled by the administration and the public, but images of dead Iraqi soldiers and citizens were shown every day with no such outcry. Part of the responsibility of journalism is to report the facts and while the picture my be unpleasant it is also a truthful representation of what is really happening.

Journalism is integral to our society. As citizens of a democracy it is our responsibility to stay informed on the state of the world that we live in. While no one can completely remove themselves from any situation, particularly if one has strong personal feelings on a subject, the public depends on the journalistic community to tell the whole truth with no spin. No one person, or small group of people, should have the power to decide what the public has a right to know.

Separated at Birth: Harry Potter vs. Tim Hunter

It is safe to say that everyone has heard of Harry Potter. Love him or hate him, Potter is one of the most well known fictional characters in the world. But what would you say if I told you that long before Harry was even a twinkle in J.K. Rowling's eye, there was another magical, bespectacled, disgruntled teenage boy wandering around Britain? Tim Hunter, created by author Neil Gaiman, bears some uncanny resemblances to The Boy Who Lived, but they have crucial differences that make them that make them two fundamentally different characters.

Physically, Tim and Harry are almost indistinguishable. They are scrawny, unkempt boys with the look of having been too long without a mother's care. They both wear thick glasses constantly in need of repair. Being unfortunately teen aged, Tim and Harry are both subject to irrational anger and violent outbursts. The boys are also both permanently marked by their magical escapades, though in very different ways. While Harry bears the infamous lightning bolt scar on his forehead, Tim has a, enchanted tattoo of a scorpion fighting a butterfly across his chest.

Magic is the biggest commonality between Tim and Harry, but the way it is received and used is one of the most crucial differences. Harry is informed of his magical lineage and whisked away to Hogwort's School for Witchcraft and Wizardry to receive a strict, structured education in the ways of magic. Tim finds out about his powers from four strange men in trench coats while skateboarding through a dark alley in East London. Tim never receives any instruction and his magical education comes entirely through trial and error. There are shadowy prophecies surrounding the births of both the boys, making them targets for magical rivals. However, while Tim battles his way through countless enemies and obstacles, Harry has the benefit of only one arch-nemesis in The Dark Lord, Voldemort.

People say you are known by the company you keep. If that is true, then it is the biggest difference between Tim and Harry. Harry's best friends and constant companions are his school mates. Ron and Hermione posses important qualities that Harry lacks, and together they provide him with a balance he could not achieve on his own. Dumbledore is Harry's doting mentor and father figure, providing him with wisdom and comfort when times are hard. Aside from the rare appearance of the acerbic, chain-smoking John Constantine, Tim has no one to council him in times of uncertainty and despair. Tim is an outcast at school and his only human companion is his sometime girlfriend Molly, but their relationship is frosty at the best of times. Tim is a loner, though he has been known to pal around with demons, faeries, the occasional succubus and Death. Both of our heroes have owls as pets and confidants, but Tim's owl is actually a transfigured yo-yo.

Tim Hunter's story was first published in 1990 while The Sorcerer's Stone did not hit the shelves until 1997. Tim's seven year head start have some people some calling Harry's originality into question. Both Gaiman and Rowling have acknowledged the astounding number of similarities between their two creations but claim that it is their fundamental differences that really make them who they are. Truly, there are several literary characters that could be endlessly compared to these two; Peter Parker as Spiderman is the most obvious example. I would like to suggest that that this is an example of collective cultural consciousness. People who live in the same cultural schema are likely to beatify the same qualities, in this case a mousy, angst-driven kid as an unlikely hero.

The Justice League

When most people think about comic books there are certain images called to mind. Comics are brightly colored books filled with bad art, silly stories and flying dudes in tights. They are read by lonely nerds in basements who collect decorative swords and action figures. In reality, lonely nerds make up only a fraction of the vibrant, thriving community of readers devoted to the medium of comics. This community is important to me, and countless others, for a variety of reasons; great artists and great authors bring new excitement into the genre every day, new media allows anyone to publish creative work independently of big name imprints, and conventions allow fans a regular opportunity to interact with creators on a personal level.

When American publishers first started distributing comic books in the 1930's they were specifically targeting children. Story lines and art were not particularly important and were kept very simple. In the 1960's and 70's an explosion in the trend of "underground comics" meant for older audiences. This attracted great artists and writers like Will Eisner and FrankFrazetta, who completely revolutionized the game and changed the way people looked at comics forever. Todays readers are mostly adults with a more refined taste when it comes to content and illustration. Some of the greatest works of literature have been translated into graphic novel form. Contemporary authors, like NeilGaiman and Michael Chabon , have not missed their chance to contribute and are causing many people to take a second look at the genre. Comic art has gone from the simple black and white line drawings of the past to brilliant, complex work by some oftoday's top artists. Creators have taken on a celebrity status, but they don't get to have all the fun.

The Internet has leveled the playing field in the comic world. With the invention of the Webcomic anyone can create and publish with a minimal cost, and have their work immediately available to a worldwide audience. Even big publishers like DC andDarkhorse have started putting out web exclusive content on blogs and social networking sites like mySpace. Most publishers hold open calls for fan submitted art and writing.

The first Comic Book Convention was held in 1970 in San Diego. That convention is still going strong, attracting bigger crowds every year. Since then "Cons", as they're called by attendees, have popped up all over the world. These Cons offer the opportunity for fans to meet the creators of their favorite comics, get books signed, and buy exclusive merchandise directly from the artists. Most importantly it allows the fans to meet each other, and make social and professional connections based on a common interest.

In the past decade comic books have finally come out of the basement and into the spotlight. A recent rash of blockbuster movies adapted from graphic novels has caused an explosion of interest from people who never considered comics as entertainment. Concurrently, the fiercely loyal base of lifelong readers has not diminished. Comics, graphic novels and Webcomics have created a global community that is growing and reinventing itself every day.