Its an unobtainable ideal.
I am one of those much maligned lawyers, but we lawyers learned a long time ago that we can never represent two conflicting interest fairly. When so-called journalist try to be unbiased by following some sort of "ethical" guidelines they are at worst a fraud and at best deluding themselves.
Did you read the first part of my post? Your response is redundant.
I am one of those much maligned lawyers, but we lawyers learned a long time ago that we can never represent two conflicting interest fairly. When so-called journalist try to be unbiased by following some sort of "ethical" guidelines they are at worst a fraud and at best deluding themselves.
Attorneys do work in an attempt to be unbiased to two opposing sides all the time. Such attorneys are called "arbitrators" and "judges".
A journalist, like a judge, should not "represent" either side, but rather make an effort to ensure that both sides are heard fairly and accurately.
A high ideal which is unobtainable should not render that ideal useless, but inspirational.