This is kind of huge. Basically, NPR is walking away from the whole bullshit “teach the controversy” style of reporting that refuses to make any judgements about arguments. You know what I mean: stories that end with the intellectual equivalent of “while sources at the Vatican insist scripture shows the Earth is the center of the universe”.

A journalist’s job isn’t to report what’s being said. It’s entirely possible one side really IS demonstrably full of shit; in fact, in American politics, it’s quite often the case, and quite often the Republicans doing the lying. And the only reason they get away with it is because news orgs are afraid to call them on their shit for fear of being branded “liberal” by Fox and its fellow-travelers.

Even NPR has been taken in by this false equivalency doctrine in the past; no more:

In all our stories, especially matters of controversy, we strive to consider the strongest arguments we can find on all sides, seeking to deliver both nuance and clarity. Our goal is not to please those whom we report on or to produce stories that create the appearance of balance, but to seek the truth.

and

At all times, we report for our readers and listeners, not our sources. So our primary consideration when presenting the news is that we are fair to the truth. If our sources try to mislead us or put a false spin on the information they give us, we tell our audience. If the balance of evidence in a matter of controversy weighs heavily on one side, we acknowledge it in our reports. We strive to give our audience confidence that all sides have been considered and represented fairly.

I’m glad they’re returning to journalism. Or, as certain numbskull NYTimes editors called it, “vigilanteism for facts.”