The Myth of Objectivity: Let the Fan Loose

I’ve been meaning to do some kind of magnum opus for a while and this is closer than anything I’ve gotten together to saying what needs to be said about our approach.

When you take emotion out of sports it becomes dull. Being a fan helps you recognize how great the sport is, trying to shut that down is not only dumb, but impossible. A reporter opening up about which fighter they like is great, specially on a site like this where discussion is encouraged.

The only problem I could see here would be if a fighter takes it personal and refuses to give interviews or bash the reporter’s credibility. It would be stupid of them to do so, but it’s possible.

Also, I feel like a reporter every time I say I’m a Jon Fitch fan in a large room, everyone just looks at me awkwardly.

Snowden,

We’ve had our differences, but this is the best thing you’ve written for BE. I couldn’t agree with you more.

Seen it a million times, but still love it.

Would Nick Diaz be a good man to have on your side in a brawl? He’s a world class grappler, but grappling doesn’t work when there is the potential for kicks to the head. Neither do pitter-pat punch combos.

Nick Diaz— excellent in one on one fights, not ideal for gang brawls. Unless there are sais involved.

And one that deals with a core issue of journalism as a field. In regards to MMA specifically, and sports as a whole, I really think the only time objectivity should be a goal is when your calling/writing the action happening, because other people are relying on you to present them with representation of whats happening as truthfully as possible. This gives those others the ability then go choose and enact their own bias. All other writing should be subjective, and, hopefully, passionate, about its topic with the caveat that the creator doesn’t either claim objectivity or hide their bias. Come out, be transparent and open, say what you think. People appreciate that much more than anything else.

But when Bill Simmons has a column on ESPN.com I feel like we’ve gone too far.

Well, not really. But if an article should ever merit manly tears, this is it.

I think bias helps the reader identify with the journo, which is a good thing imo

Wow. This article made my little fan boy tear ducts water. Great piece.

So much truth in this.

Love it.

Who critiques something they love more harshly than a true fan? Look at message boards and blogs devoted to any specific team. All of them take a harder look at their team than the mainstream press ever could. Who can dissect a weakness more ferociously and thoroughly than a true fan? And why not bring these strengths into journalism?

I guess my question is, true fans seem to overlook facts most of the time and let their emotions get the best of them so what they are reporting is not always based in fact. I guess I see what you are referring to as a “strength” is actually a weakness in journalism. I agree that their is not such thing as an objective reporter, but isn’t trying to be as objective as possible the most fair and accurate way to report a story (I realize this differs from things like op-eds)? I am a firm believer of as Colin Cowherd would say “stripping emotion out of it”

Really good article. Although I agree with others that there is a place for tempering some of the extremes that become realizable through open bias, the thrust of your point is right on.

This is why I’ve always liked the pick em posts on mma sites or even nfl radio shows. Let’s writers and talent let loose.

as long as the outlet makes it known that they’re reporting their point of view. It’s only when media presents stilted news as objective fact that it becomes a problem. BE always makes it known that they’re giving an opinion. What worries me are sites like UFC.com, which has been slowly wiggling its way into the “media” mask. UFC will always present their version of the truth as fact, and if upcoming fans start going there for their news, then it’ll be a problem.

Though I don’t believe in god…I believe if there is one he would be a fan of BE. Cuz this place (and mania) are the bees-kneeeees

great read buddeh, Rec’d

I have never met a writer who I disagree with their conclusions as much as you, but still come back to read your posts due to the quality of the writing.

Reading other writers when you agree with their conclusions is easy whether their quality is good or not, but it is rare to find writers like Snowden. Rarer still to have it be a sports writer, and we talking “lotto odds” coming from an MMA writer (no offense, it has to do with the maturity, or lack there of, of the sport).

As for the article itself, I can’t agree with comparing “sports reporting” to “news reporting”, because the news reporters have more responsibility to be unbiased compared to sport reporters. And I do agree that sport reporters should be fans first (unlike news reporters). Passionate reporting about sport leads to fandom, passionate reporting about the news leads to politics. I’ll take more fandom and less politics please.

Excellent candor, concision and content- I echo the others who state that this is the best thing that Jon has written for this site. I only have one question though: Why is it, when any poster accuses a staff member of having bias, that poster is instantly browbeaten with the age old “staff has to blindly love (insert org or fighter name here) or we’re haters” approach? The above acknowledgment of Snowden’s allegiance to Nick Diaz is the first bias I’ve seen named, yet I’ve seen writers both reveling in the unique subjective view staff members here are free to take and calling fans butthurt huggers for pointing out the biases that are only natural among humans who love a sport and it’s participants. I hope that this acknowledgment will give the writers more freedom to express their love and passion for the sport that brings all of us here without being called “haters” or “shills”; and posters the freedom to identify these biases and define their place in a discussion or post without being accused of being irrational, blind sheep.

This piece explains why I like fighters like BJ Penn & Rampage. Health permitting they will never turn down a fight. They may not always win nor have any game plan other than fist on face but damn if their passion, willingness to fight anyone and enthusiasm doesn’t get me every time. It’s also prolly why I tend to shy away from the more cerebral fighters who go out there and have a detailed plan on how to breakdown their opponent and never put themselves in jeopardy. I like guys who go out there to put on a show for me more than to win on points … If that makes sense. Still got mad respect for anyone willing to get into the cage but I’m always going to pull for a Forrest Griffin or Nick Diaz type over a more tactical / cerebral fighter.

I try to adhere to a slightly less melodramatic version of the Hemingway mantra: “There is nothing to writing, all you do is sit down and bleed.”

I’ve worked at a newspaper and, frankly, I was bored by whatever was just straight news (it’s very easy to do “straight news” in a county of 20,000). I’m the kind of guy who, if you want facts, I’ll give you bullet points. When I write, if it’s to be good, there will be passion and the truest expression of what’s in my mind and my heart that I can force out of my fingertips… that is the only honest way to write. We all have vantage points, and if we do not speak from them, we don’t speak at all.

i don’t have a problem with bias, so long as you guys are at least trying to be fair.
and i don’t think that either i or anyone else would stick around on this site if you weren’t.

so i’ll leave you with this thought…

Pure 100% objectivity is impossible in this field, but being fair & accountable is a must. I find this to be the most honest mma site around. The passion is also necessary – why would anyone be attracted to a lifeless site of pure facts? When those two are in balance, the writing is excellent.

Werner Herzog speaks of two truths – the ecstatic truth and the account’s truth – may BE always pursue the former.

but if you keep writing pieces like this I’m not going to have any alternative.

Great write up.

Bias is a funny thing (unless it’s Len Bias and that was just sad), what I really find humorous in terms of people talking about bias in politics is that most of them view the perceived bias thought the lens of their own personal bias. They have a bias viewpoint about what they think is biased reporting. Not only can’t we get away from it most of us can’t even accurately identify it unless it is just outlandishly apparent because we all have our own bias to start with.

As far as sports writing is concerned, if you are writing about the facts then write about the facts and if you are editorializing on a subject then of course there will be a bias to the writing, how can you have an opinion without having a personal bias? Journalistic integrity in that sense isn’t being unbiased and fair it’s being truthful with your readers about where your opinions are coming from. We all have personal opinions and personal viewpoints, as long as you aren’t lying to me about where you stand in your writing then it’s all good.

Lame reasoning to make a lack of effort in fact gathering and formulating convincing arguments seem like passion and enthusiasm. If I want to read articulated fans opinions, I go to the comments. If you don’t want to be a journalist, write on your facebook wall.

Mr. Snowden! Fantastic!

There are very few genuine “news” stories in sports. And the sports figures are the DULLEST interviews in pop culture. It makes sense therefore that the sport’s writer has to be more creative and subjective in his or her commentary. Not that any one cares or reads it, but on my blog, I am pretty harsh on Josh Barnett and Ken Shamrock for their use of steroids (and Ken’s actual advocating of ‘roids). Although ti’s just a blog, it is important to me to base my judgments on OBJECTIVE truth. From there, I can render my interpretation of reality based on that criteria and my own response to the story.

But what I hate is when a writer doesn’t have the imagination to understand why someone else would like or dislike a fighter. Case in point, Machida. I read lots of pundits who go after his fighting style and speak as if there is a general consensus that the objective truth is that Machida is bad fighter because he has style that HE doesn’t like. Likewise, when a fighter is critiqued, like GSP, for perhaps lacking aggression and killer instinct, the heaping of scorn on that writer (or comment poster) for not “understanding MMA” or telling them to “go back to watching WWE”, I feel that those who do the tarring aren’t taking a moment to evaluate the criticism.

I realize a lot of this seems like a straw man argument because I don’t have links to examples, but I think if you’ve you been around the MMA online community long enough, you should have a sense of what I am talking about.

I enjoyed reading it so much I tweeted and tumblr posted it. Job well done.