My friend Adam Pagnucco, who writes the indispensable Maryland Politics Watch, scored a coup last week as Kathleen Miller, a real-live “msm” reporter, agreed to describe a day in the life of a reporter in five installments.

People often hold a number of assumptions about journalists, including:

• They only like to cover negative news
• They are not thoughtful about the consequences of how they report
• They only care about getting the story
• They are in collusion
• They purposefully kill stories that would expose high-level corporate wrongdoing

This excellent series, which had me riveted, puts the lie to all of that.

One passage in particular moved me. Kathleen discusses the controversy that ensued when an editor proposed that reporters start inserting their own voice into stories when they know that something that a source says is untrue. This is a deeper question than you might think — there are strong journalistic norms of staying out of stories. This discussion is quite thoughtful:

It’s an interesting concept. I think it’s both smart and dangerous. If you’ve covered an administration or an issue for years like [the editor] or many of his team, you are probably an expert in your own right and deserve the power to call it like you see it.

You can’t use that style every day, in every story or on every topic, however, or you risk editorializing. There are some topics – for me, environmental policy – where at this stage of the game, I have no business calling BS or cutting through the clutter. I’m too green, (yikes – pun unintended) to take on that role. In others, like local immigration policy or WSSC drama, I feel like I’ve been in the weeds enough to cut through the crap on occasion.

I urge you to read the entire series here.