The idea that journalism is or should be fair and unbiased is crap.
The reason towns had two papers was to accomodate opposing views points. Then somewhere in the early 20th century someone perpetuated the idea that "real" journalists are unbiased.
No one expects them to be unbiased, anymore than we expect Christians to behave exactly as Christ instructed. The point is that its a goal. Its also the reason that papers have editorial pages and news pages. I personally want to hear both sides, if only to confirm that its just the usual B.S. Of course, since it is usually the same B.S., I end up yelling at the t.v. like an idiot in the middle of his Orwellian two minutes of hate, and as such, I tend to not turn it on,and read the opposing side when relevant.
A Reporter trying to be unbiased may present both arguments, even if they are biased towards one and make that obvious. We have gotten to the point where the left is so afraid of the opposing argument they habitually omit it, and I would hate to see our side do that. We should never develop such hubris that we dismiss the opposing side out of hand ( as the left does to us) because occasionally-- very, very seldom in fact, they may have something worthwhile to hear.
