Angela Lu of WORLD Magazine contemplates a story from last week.

Atlanta Progressive News (APN) reporter Jonathan Springston was fired last week because “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,” according to an e-mail from his editor.

What a fascinating story. And it raises so many interesting questions.

I don’t deny APN’s right to make the termination. They would appear to be an ideological news website (here’s their link), and it’s no more out of line for them to fire someone who denies their ideology than it would be for a Christian web site to fire someone who converted to Wicca.

But I have to wonder, what are the rules for subjective journalism? Is it possible to fact-check a story, when the editor’s reality and the reporter’s are held to be completely unconnected? And why would anyone go to them for news, if they admit from the outset that what they’re reporting may not apply in the reader’s world?

What if a subjective journalist committed plagiarism? Maybe there’s nothing wrong with plagiarism in his reality. Or maybe the original document doesn’t exist for him. Who’s to say?

And indeed, how can the editorial board be sure that their subjectivity rule applies in Jonathan Springston’s universe? Maybe he works for an Atlanta Progressive Journal that embraces objectivity.

These are a few of the dilemmas of postmodernism. And one reason why the whole structure is collapsing.