A journalist friend once remarked to me that “fair and balanced” reportage is an impossible ideal because the two terms are at war. To be fair is to tell the truth as best you can. To be balanced is to consult a flat-Earther for a counterpoint every time you write a story about a shuttle launch. This is a fine distinction, and one that I'm guessing the good folks at Atlanta Progressive News failed to grok while attempting to justify the firing of senior staff writer Jonathan Springston because of his unseemly attachment to... objectivity.

Many thanks to reader Clare Zimmermann for putting us on the trail of this news item, which she found at The Huffington Post. A more in-depth assessment may be found at Creative Loafing. There, too, you will find the full statement from Atlanta Progressive News, so you may put these words in their proper context:

At a very fundamental, core level, Springston did not share our vision for a news publication with a progressive perspective. He held on to the notion that there was an objective reality that could be reported objectively, despite the fact that that was not our editorial policy at Atlanta Progressive News. It just wasn't the right fit.

Granted, Atlanta Progressive News does not attempt to disguise its political bias. (Click here for proof.) They'll admit to anyone who cares that they're not objective; that their reportage has spin; that they're just concerned and semi-hysterical citizens like ourselves, out to do the good work of promulgating their viewpoints in the marketplace ideas. But still: If there's no "objective reality," what the hell are those Atlanteans reporting on, anyway?