Many well-meaning media-watchers believe that the goal should be absolute objective purity, but to me, that isn't human. Organizations are made up of people, people have leanings, and those leanings will always to some degree shade the choice of language and visuals. Fox News now regularly does what the networks have done for years -- lets unmistakable code words and signals slip into the coverage, albeit of the opposite tincture.
Why not acknowledge the elephant? Talk about it in the news product, bring readers in on the struggle, make the bias question an occasional sidebar to the Roberts coverage. A really bold newspaper editor (any out there?) might send out two reporters of opposite ideological persuasions to cover one day of the confirmation hearings. Have each write a news story, and run them side by side, labeled as to leaning. Leave off the bylines, if you like. This idea may seem a little cute and professionally self-absorbed, but you know what? People would read it, and be impressed that you were wrestling with the bias question, instead of pretending it isn't there.
That's an excellent point, and one that I've made here before.
