Well, yes, there might be One Truth, but no one can affirm it. Each one can just deal with his own truth, which can change with the point of view of others but no one can come saying "my truth is The Truth". Thus it opens the door to "there is no truth", which form my point of view is valid as "no one can pretend getting The Truth" (if ever there is one). You can "think" "believe" "be convinced" but you must acknowledged that you can be wrong, even would it be ultimately.
Then, in media, well, you can pretend it, but then you have to come with your arguments about the interpretation/description of such or such fact, and you come with things that seem totally unlikely to most of people, then you'll likely stay alone with your truth. Your stuff might be totally disconnected of the One and Only Truth and people can listen you nevertheless, but humans are not always attracted by accuracy...
Whatever...
And:
the Rupert Murdoch worshippers on the right now claim that there is no such thing as truth, no such thing as bias, that all journalists are hacks, that any assertion that they may have aspired to ethics or professional standards is a naive religion, and the media consists of nothing but a cacophony of text with no particular meaning.
Saying this is claiming for a truth.
And:
If the idea of public dialogue is stripped of all notion of truth, standards, then how is it anything but lies? How does any political conversation people have become anything but lies?
If there is not truth, there is no lies...
