These articles go into depth on how critics should be objective. They should not be biased toward one show or another based on if they want to be on the show or not. Modern Family is a great show, but if I were a critic I would critically tear it apart if I found a flaw. Greatness is not perfection. I totally agree with the statement about comment sections and social media swaying the critics’ opinion. It must have an influence on the major critics out there. One cool thing from one of the next articles is that Stepinwall reviews 15 or more shows a week and watches them just like most people do at home, week by week. This allows him to get that objective opinion of the show and write about all the exciting, gasping moments right after the show airs.

I clicked on the New York Times ethics policy link and it took me to a site where I clicked on Introduction and Purpose. Apparently its purpose is to enhance society by creating, collecting and distributing high-quality news. Their main focus is content. I clicked on this link because it summed more interesting to me than any others. Saying that Stepinwall hasn’t always been true to the New York Times ethics policy means that he isn’t doing his job of distributing the most high quality news. I also clicked on the link that said “Cameo Appearance on Community”. This made much more sense out of why Alan went on community. He simply didn’t want to turn down an offer, especially one that says, “Do you want to watch the two main female actors fight in oil?” So he jumped in because he likes the show, not because he was trying to be on TV for any reason, but he later realized why he should’ve said no.