This article presents two theoretical approaches to the issue of journalistic objectivity: intersubjectivity (MEYER, 1989; SPONHOLZ, 2009) and objectivity as a strategic ritual (TUCHMAN, 1999). By means of a critical literature review, this study shows that these are two possible and quite distinct ways of answering what is at stake when journalists claim objectivity for themselves. The first approach entails a discussion about the ontological foundation of the world we live in and the best way to know reality. In turn, the second involves a series of procedures that journalists follow - not because they believe they will access objectivity, but because this methodology functions as a means of defending the risks of the occupation. The results indicate that, in intersubjectivism, the journalistic activity is committed to events, regardless of subjective interpretation; the presence of different points of view is a strategy to approach the event. As such an approach results from no ontological understanding of existence, the strategic ritual is concerned with the journalist's withdrawal from the exhibition, thus letting the facts "speak for themselves," as if this was a possible operation. These findings evince the importance of an ontological basis in the old - and still pertinent - discussion on journalistic objectivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]