With all the reports going around about a month ago about the Associated Press taking a decidedly different approach in their reporting – namely one that mixes in judgement calls with facts, and thus limiting objectivity – it seemed like the world would have to look somewhere differently from a source of objective reporting.  How about Reuters?

Maybe not so much.

I saw an interesting story tonight about Vladimir Putin apparently saving a TV crew from a Siberian tiger.  I went to go take a look, and ran into this whopper of a sentence (emphasis mine):

Putin, taking a break from lambasting the West over Georgia, apparently saved the crew while on a trip to a national park to see how researchers monitor the tigers in the wild.

While the rest of the report seems to be okay, I must question that sentence.  Why not, “Putin, taking a vacation…”?

I looked quickly for more reports on non-objective reports from Reuters, but only found another blog post concerning pictures submitted to Reuters.  There are probably many I missed.

Can we read/listen to nothing anymore without having to strip away all the opinion and judgement calls as we go?

(Cross-posted from Poligazette)