Political Punch

If you can report the story instead of trying to create the story, then you should vote. To me voting is based on principles. Everyone, most people, have things they believe in. So, why not vote? If you can't do your job without being biased, then you shouldn't even be reporting the news. I don't see what the problem is. It's not as if you or any other journalist will sway voters based on your vote.

You all certainly are entitled to your vote. What you are NOT allowed to do is to be completely biased in your reporting. Neutral, my tush!!! The political press has been anything BUT neutral in this campaign. This campaign is historic, and it is scandalous how the likes of David Shuster and Chris Matthews have been allowed to take pot shots at any of the candidates. Shame on all of you; you've displayed a total lack of integrity!!! That ,too, will go down in history.

Abstaining from voting simply because you're a journalist is dumb. Only an idiot expects a journalist to have no opinions. Part of your job may be avoiding the impression that your personal opinions shape your words, but it's absolutely comical to imagine that you have no opinion at all.

It is exactly this ridiculous view journalists have that they are "above politics" that has been to the detriment of journalism itself. The failure of journalists to search for fact, relying instead on "he-said, she-said" is a travesty, and refraining from voting, simply because "a vote is an investment" is absurd.

Are you allowed to think? To what extent? Grow up.

What difference does it make if you vote or not? The fact is that day after day you show who you're invested in by going way out of your way to bash Hillary and the Clintons. The clear and obvious beneficiary is Obama. I'd rather you just vote for Obama and stop pretending to be an objective reporter.

So where does journalistic neutrality end and personal responsibility begin? Have you ever had someone ask you about a particular political situation as a professional reporter and then ask you about your personal opinion of it, even guaranteeing that your opinion is "off the record?"

I can understand and appreciate your choice, because you're clearly following your conscience, but I could never agree with it. As a professional, you have a responsibility to your audience to be impartial in your presentation of facts: otherwise, you're acting as a commentator and not a reporter. But as a private citizen, you should be able to analyze those facts that you deal with and make a personal decision which you should be able to express freely.

I would surmise that there's nothing in your contract with ABC News that abridges your individual civil rights like voting. The right to vote is not a trifle and has been paid for dearly by many in our history; I would hate to see even one voice stilled for fear of compromising one's integrity.

Every US citizen should vote! I trust journalists should try to keep their personal bias out of their work (which is almost impossible). Yet, it would seem silly to give up one of our most prized priviledges just to be a journalist with 'integrity'. It just takes extreme discipline when writing or reporting, but I think it is possible. Not only is it possible but it is American at the core.

You left out Ron Paul. We know where your heart is.... ;-)

Seriously, I think it's a mistake to put your occupation ahead of your duties as a citizen. I could, however, understand you refusing to share your choice with anyone. I could also understand not voting in primaries in which you had to declare a party.

I don't begrudge any journalist his or her constitutional right to personally support or oppose political candidates -- but using their media outlets to play with their audience's emotions is a bit much. I have lost respect for some of them, I questioned everything I read and watch. MSNBC, CNN, ABCNEWS etc, have lost credidibilty for the way the are covering the primaries.
Please read more on the subject on media research.org

And, by the way, a straight-up partisan journalist (on the right or the left) is more honest and more deserving of respect than a journalist who hides his biases and pretends to be "objective." You choose not to vote simply because you want to hide your biases -- do you really think that hiding your biases eliminates them? This is infinitely more dishonest than simply saying, "I voted for X, but I do the best I can to be objective in my reporting."

This is laughable. How can journalists protect their facade of faux objectivity? Maybe if you guys spent less time trying to appear "objective" and more time challenging those in power (Republican or Democrat), the American people might not rate the media somewhere between child molesters and baby seal killers. But, I forgot, your main function is court stenography and attending cocktail parties.

C'mon. We all know you're voting for Hillary.

So does this mean the editors of Car & Driver can not buy a vehicle for their personal use because they are showing bias by choosing one model over another?

This is another media "holier than thou" moment. "Look at the sacrifice we make for the sake of fairness" It's like saying if you report on the environment you shouldn't breath. If it were a debate of contributing to a campaign then sure there's a debate, and probably reporters should not.

Can't they separate the personal from the professional? Just because they are journalists doesn't mean they can't be citizens. It is the citizen's duty to vote their conscience.