Via Romenesko, former Time and Wall Street Journal staffer G. Pascal Zachary says, “critics of conventional journalism are correct on nearly all counts” and proposes a new creed for journalism — one which involves dropping the “big lie” of the objectivity ethos:

Stop talking about journalists “objectivity” and instead promote the concept of journalistic “integrity.” This means we must substitute the concept of fair and balanced with the concept of fair and accurate. Having an agenda raises the importance of ethics and honesty. Because a journalist is trying to prove a point, his choices of sources become a legitimate area of reader scrutiny. Anonymous sources can still be used, but journalists must take responsibility for whom they quote, whether they quote them by name or not. The days of hiding behind a source are over (thank you, Judith Miller). Passion is important. Partisanship is inevitable. Journalists should not be embarrassed to admit to either.

I’ve written about this issue before and reached the same conclusion. By the way, I should note that this article — with which I wholeheartedly agree — comes from a left-leaning Web site. This is not about left vs. right. It’s about taking bias out of the equation and seeing whether that can lead to a more sophisticated critique of journalism. I don’t have a problem with journalists being liberal. My problem is the frequency with which one-sided polemics are passed off as neutral narratives.