Periodismo objetivista, construtivismo y filosofia: Del discurso autoritario a la interpelación dialógica de la comunidade comunicativa

Abstract

This paper analyzes the conception of objectivist journalism, based on the theory of the correspondence of representation with reality, contrasting it with the constructivist conception of journalism, based on the consensual theory of truth. In this sense, it considers that the positivist notion of objectivity results in authoritarian journalistic discourse in order to validate itself, with the presumption of obtaining a perfect knowledge of reality through the verification of the absolute distinction between fact and opinion. The constructivist perspective, on the contrary, identifies the commitment of journalism to represent the significant diversity of existing interpretations of the concrete problems experienced by society. It also questions the possible contradiction between Robert Park's position on the need for journalism to transparently issue value judgments on those responsible for the reported actions and to call on people in the communication community to deliberate on public issues, with Peirce's conceptions of the incompleteness of the semiosis process and fallibilism.