Reassessing the ethics of journalism
A question I’m commonly asked when explaining El Surti’s visual journalism approach – with its memes, flashy characters, and eye-catching graphics – is how we ensure objectivity and neutrality. The same concern arises whenever I talk about how we interact with audiences.
Since our inception, my co-founders and I have held a critical view of these principles, especially when treated as universal and immutable within the industry. We grew up witnessing the harm legacy media inflicted under the guise of impartiality on some of the country’s most vulnerable: landless campesinos, Indigenous communities, and poor young migrants. Instead of challenging unequal power dynamics, many outlets reinforced them.
Some of these media organisations historically portrayed essential struggles for basic, constitutionally protected rights as irrational at best and criminal at worst. In some cases, owners leveraged their platforms to blur the line between public interest and their own political or economic agendas, manufacturing consensus where dissent existed, or fuelling polarisation where understanding was needed.
At El Surti, we prioritise transparency and fairness over neutrality and objectivity. We back every claim with data, expert sources, and first-hand testimonies – and we are also upfront about our perspective.
Audiences can easily tell where we stand on the climate crisis, what we make of the government’s fundamentalist position regarding reproductive rights, or our concern about the unchecked influence of bad actors that spread disinformation.
We have not refrained from embracing emotion either. The beauty, humour, and suspense our readers encounter in our stories has helped them navigate these complex issues. The best of our work has broken down prejudice, stirred empathy, and ignited a sense of shared responsibility. Our view and approach are not unique.
Most news outlets are familiar with accusations that their reporting relies on extractive practices. And media scholars affirm that there can be no application of traditional values without scrutiny. To paraphrase Dr Sue Robinson’s observation in How Journalists Engage: “Mainstream journalists have used [traditional values as an] identity construct to prop up problematic status quos.”⁴⁴
It’s also worth remembering that impartiality as a core value in journalism is a relatively recent invention. In the U.S., significant social, economic, and cultural shifts were required before impartiality replaced the partisanship that defined 19th-century newspapers.⁴⁵ Back then, journalism was widely seen as a tool for stimulating affiliation and civic participation of protected classes.
Another overlooked truth is that, for many, as Coda’s editor-in-chief Natalia Antelava wrote, “neutrality is a luxury”.⁴⁶ She offers the example of Black journalists in the U.S. whose work cannot reasonably be separated from their existence in a society where systemic prejudice exists.
The same may be true for how many audiences relate to the media. A recent study examining preferences for impartial news across 40 countries – including several in the Global South such as Mexico, South Africa, Malaysia, and Brazil – found that, beyond the politically and ideologically engaged, young people, women, and less socioeconomically advantaged groups are consistently less likely to prioritise objectivity in news.⁴⁷ Another study found extremely negative views of public service journalism among marginalised groups in the UK.⁴⁸ They told report authors that, as of now, news is not contributing to solve any of their most crucial problems:
By definition, marginalised people and communities need systemic change so they’re not marginalised. So, unless journalism provides a route to action or change – if it doesn’t help us live better or easier lives – then for many people it will continue to be an empty product with little.
⁴⁴ Robinson, S. (2023). How Journalists Engage. A Theory of Trust-Building, Identities and Care. Oxford University Press.
⁴⁵ Ryfe, D. (2006). News, Culture and Public Life. Journalism Studies, 7(1), 60–77.
⁴⁶ Coda Story. (2025). The capture of journalism and the illusion of objectivity. Retrieved from https://www.codastory.com/authoritarian-tech/the-capture-of-journalism-and-the-illusion-of-objectivity/
⁴⁷ Mont’Alverne, C. et al. (2025). Who Wants Impartial News? Investigating Determinants of Preferences for Impartiality in 40 Countries. International Journal of Communication, 19, 1581–1603.
⁴⁸ Hayat, A. et al. (2025). News for All. The Story so Far: Participatory Research Report. Media Cymru.