Should journalists drop the facade of objectivity?

Recently, there has been a little more opinion in the coverage of the U.S presidential election. 

It's been more like this and this, and sometimes even this. 

For University of British Columbia journalism associate professor Peter Klein, who is American, it's quite surprising. 

Things [journalists] might have been telling their partners at the dinner table about Trump, they're now starting to share and that is a huge departure from how journalists typically cover elections.-Peter Klein, UBC Graduate School of Journalism

"It's bizarre. Absolutely bizarre," says Klein, but he sees a public benefit in journalists dropping that facade of objectivity. 

Klein thinks there is value in journalists showing that they are human with opinions and biases, and honestly declaring that to the audience.

He argues it not only addresses the question of media bias, but can also increase the credibility of journalists as they try to cover issues or people who they may not agree with. 

"There is something healthy in journalists opening up that door and sharing," he says. 

With Donald Trump in particular, Klein says another factor that has contributed to the amount of opinion being injected in this election is Trump's frequent use of broad platitudes, and the absence of facts all together. 

I don't know if he's an idiot or genius, but he's brilliant in a way of deflating us because it's like punching a gigantic balloon. You can never really get a good punch in because there's nothing there.-Peter Klein, on Donald Trump

Of course, Klein says, it's not the first time journalists have expressed their opinion about politics. 

He points to the Edward R. Murrow's television takedown of Senator Joseph McCarthy in 1954. 

Klein says the change in the coverage of the Trump campaign could be a similar watershed moment for journalism. 

Click the play button above to hear Peter Klein's interview with guest host Stephen Quinn.