I have enjoyed this series overall (currently on episode 8 of 10 on Netflix), but I have been increasingly frustrated with, what seems to me, is intentional obfuscation of language in the series. This is especially difficult to endure because the series claims--as it's title suggests--to be unvarnished truth. Now, as far as I can tell (and I am in no way perfect in this), there are two possible reasons for the lack of full transparency in this series.

The first possibility I see is simple ignorance. Many of the reporters (especially true of the "fellows" episode) are quite young and have not yet had the breadth of experience that brings some level of suspicion to every clear cut assumption being made. If this is the reason for the lack of transparency, then the profession needs to demand more growth and wisdom from itself and its reporters.

The second possibility I see--which is far more troubling if true--is an intentional decision to obfuscate truth that does not bring the outcomes you are hoping for. The journalistic attitude this reveals in a nut shell is that it's not a journalists duty to "report both sides." In other words, I'm not going to give an inch to the enemy (in this case journalists reporting in a contrary manner), so I don't "report" those facts that are unhelpful to my "side."

This type of one-sided journalism is not only tolerated in our current global culture, but even celebrated (or condemned) based on giving voice to "your side" (or "the other side") of the problem. Journalism that is excellent in my opinion is that which transcends for perspective, that truly wants to get at the root truth, instead of expressing one truth or another. So why write about this here? I felt like this series was on the cusp of doing excellent journalism.

If you want to read more about what I think many see as "talking about a problem without really solving a problem" there is a great article I found here.

One final thought: So what are we to do to combat this tendency we all seem to have? I think all of us--and particularly journalist's due to their position--should be able to articulate the opposing viewpoints, and ought to include it in any reporting if we ever hope to get people to think rather than just scream.