Under Washington bureau chief Ron Fournier, the Associated Press is moving away from traditional journalism (read: reverse pyramids, equal voices to all sides) and implementing a "less bullshit" strategy: "In the stories the new boss is encouraging, first-person writing and emotive language are okay. So is scrapping the stonefaced approach to journalism that accepts politicians’ statements at face value and offers equal treatment to all sides of an argument. Instead, reporters are encouraged to throw away the weasel words and call it like they see it when they think public officials have revealed themselves as phonies or flip-floppers."

The argument could be made — an, on this website, we might have even made it — that moving in this direction is a good idea, because it outs politicians and other snakes for their true agendas without having to play nicey-nice because of journalism's rules.

Then there's the other side of things:

Letting journalists decide which side is right, who's might be speaking out of both sides of his mouth, and who deserves a voice will likely only contribute to Americans' degrading trust in the news media, and open up a playground for bias accusations.

They're calling it "accountability journalism." Because accountability in journalism is somehow a new concept.

“The problem,” says James Taranto, the Wall Street Journal’s Best of the Web columnist and a frequent critic of what he sees as the AP’s liberal bias, “is that while you can do opinion journalism and incorporate reporting into it, you can’t say you’re doing straight reporting, and then add opinion to that.”

Then again, being able to call out a public official for lying, or being able to label Jesse Helms a racist, might just juice up our ability to believe what we're reading.

But be forewarned: You'll still have to pay $12.50 for every five-word quote.

[Politico]