This could be risky and prone to misunderstanding, but as a journalist and a member of “the media,” I think it’s time people understand the role bias plays in news beyond cable-channel caricatures.

When I’m not cooking up opinions for The State Press, I work as a reporter for The Arizona Republic. Both jobs involve writing for the printed paper, but their roles are fundamentally opposed.

Reporters shouldn’t have opinions. It’s been drilled into my head by every journalism professor and every lecture.

Even in casual conversation, reactions to my media job reinforce the idea that reporters can’t show bias — bias is for entertainment, not journalism.

I agree. Even without countless lectures on journalistic ethics, I know objective reporting’s value and its use to society.

But the realities of unbiased reporting can’t be captured in a lecture. Awash in a world full of agendas and impartiality, keeping a distance while still digging into a story takes careful and conscientious consideration.

Lectures and discussions can only frame the issue. It snaps into focus when faced with a real scenario — my test came Saturday.

Residents of Arizona, or anyone with access to news, know the gunpowder ethos behind the illegal-immigration issue.

Two rallies occurred in Phoenix on Saturday to address it. The first was a heavily promoted and reported protest opposing Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s controversial methods of immigration enforcement. I didn’t go.

Instead, I was assigned to the second rally, a much smaller and sparsely covered rally in favor of the sheriff. I consider myself an experienced reporter, but I’d never faced a rally I was so reluctant to cover. Driving out to the West Valley, I psyched myself up for a severe test of my commitment to objectivity.

I disagree with Apraio. It took a conscientious effort to listen and shorthand the sheriff’s speech. Sprinkle in some charged exclamations from the crowd, and I was more than a little uneasy.

However, in retrospect, it may be some of my best reporting.

In journalistic fashion, I stuck to my quotes, letting the people speak for themselves. They made their points, and to their credit, some good ones. However, emotionally charged rallies tend to bring out the most vocal debaters of an issue. A fact-and-figure journalist faced with passionate temper doesn’t mix well, and the rally participants ensured I had no shortage of strong quotes.

Public opinion certainly has a place in the news, but not when buttressed by spurious statistics. In assembling the story, I had to look for opinions carried enough credibility to be launched into public debate, like a surgeon trimming the healthy arguments from the anemic.

It’s difficult in the torrent of the moment to shelf your emotions and dig for statistical support, but it ultimately helped me wade through the issue.

Both sides stretch statistics.

The line between opinion and news is dutifully guarded, but that doesn’t mean reporters don’t have opinions.

Discordant reporters might even do better jobs, asking more critical questions than those eager to join in the protest themselves.

If it pays to be skeptical, then it pays to be biased — so long as you always know how to channel them both.

Channing is one caricature you won’t see on cable news, but e-mail him at channing.turner@asu.edu.