I live in a rural area and my wife is the managing editor of the local paper, and she made the decision NOT to endorse ANY candidates, because she feared that IF they backed either, the fallout would be tremendous.
Although she's a Democrat(I'm Republican by the way...I'm working on bringing her over to the dark side though!)she voted for and supported Bush, and her publisher is a staunch Republican who fell in on the party line. However, ALL of her writers are DEMS, and they all voted for Kerry, and were just dying to endorse Kerry.
In her editorial meeting she told them, "Kerry will probably carry this county, but it won't be because of OUR endorsement. If anything, it will be because we live in a college town with a bunch of liberals. However, the majority of our ADVERTISERS are NOT liberals, nor are they Democrats or Kerry supporters, so IF we were to endorse KERRY(since the libs/DEMS on the staff outnumber the conservatives/Rep's)it may make you feel great now, and it might even make the liberals happy now, but, the bottom line is: Even if Kerry wins, there will be at least 1/2 the writing staff on this paper come 2005, because without the AD $$$'s, I'll have to cut staff!"
They took the hint, and decided to pooh pooh the "endorsement" idea!
The local paper here can't give their papers away. We even threaten to call the police, for littering, if they throw FREE ones in our yard. They are HUGE Clinton supporters. I guess they see how far that got them. Too many of his supporters are BUMS (morally broke too).
Sounds like your wife had the right idea. The pretense of objective reporting and endorsements are not compatible.