This theoretical master’s dissertation explores the cleavage between how audiences and journalists perceive transparency and objectivity through the following research questions: “Can transparency be understood independently of objectivity, or can it be included in a model of objectivity?”, “What are the underlying interests with normative concepts like objectivity and transparency, and what drives the process of replacing objectivity with transparency?” and “Can transparency replace objectivity’s dominance as ethical ideal in journalism?”. The questions are studied through a comparative research design of the main concepts transparency and objectivity and by employing a methodology that consists of secondary data analysis of qualitative data and qualitative meta-analysis. The theoretical framework consists of pragmatic objectivity, the process model of journalists’ roles, paradigm building and boundary maintenance and is applied to the secondary empirical material (academic articles). The results show that transparency is compatible with pragmatic objectivity, and I argue that unifying the ethical ideals is a way forward in order to resolve the contestation between the ethical ideals. The results also show that transparency has not reached the status of a normative role in contemporary news journalism. Furthermore, there are indications that transparency in contemporary news journalism has not replaced objectivity’s dominance, as the journalistic community is generally unwilling to give any genuine insight into its methodology. From a boundary maintenance perspective, the results also show that objectivity is in the process of being defended by journalists, as it is a highly practiced and valued ethical ideal in journalistic communities.