This quote incisively captures a prevalent tension within journalism, particularly in the political arena. The term "advocate" often carries a negative connotation in journalistic circles, implying a loss of objectivity or neutrality. However, as Glenn Greenwald suggests, the accusation of advocacy appears not when journalists promote a cause without basis, but rather when they challenge entrenched beliefs and norms accepted by the political establishment in Washington, D.C. This highlights a paradox: journalists who adhere strictly to dominant narratives are rarely called advocates, yet those who disrupt out-of-step orthodoxies face such labeling. The quote invites reflection on the role of journalism itself—should it merely report the prevailing ideologies, or should it serve as a watchdog that scrutinizes power structures? Labeling journalists as advocates can be weaponized to silence dissent and delegitimize courageous reporting that dares to confront mainstream political ideas. In doing so, this rhetoric undermines the essential democratic function journalism has of fostering transparency and holding authorities accountable. Ultimately, the quote challenges us to reconsider what we expect from those who report the news. It advocates for a more nuanced appreciation of journalistic advocacy—not as a bias, but as a necessary component of truth-seeking when that truth conflicts with established orthodoxies. This perspective is critical in an era where independent journalism is increasingly vital for a healthy and informed democracy.