Should journalists be saying "to play devil's advocate..."?

Shouldn't they always be playing public's advocate? I haven't heard it said much, in fact only twice, but shouldn't every question they ask be asked because it's somehow relevant? Expressly playing devil's advocate sounds like an admission of conflict of interest.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Graylight · 51-55, F

Being a devil's advocate by birth and nature, I can assure you that it implies no conflict of interest.

What's somebody does in playing The Devil's Advocate is simply provide insight to all sides of the argument. In loftier language, it's not unlike Socratic debate, where a point is made and then countered in order to test its weaknesses and strengths.

A devil's advocate doesn't need to support the points they make, they simply put them out there for everyone to see.

ImperialAerosolKidFromEP · 46-50, M

@Graylight yes, but the issue is reporters [i] saying[/i] they are playing devil's advocate