[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Aside from the editorial pages and talk radio, which are transparently biased,

"Aside" from them, in the sense that they wear their perspectives on their sleeves, rather than presumptuously claiming objectivity

the hard news will never be sterilized from viewpoint bias.

. . . because a viewpoint is embedded in the process of story selection, and that viewpoint may not have been examined by the journalist. Certainly the last thing the journalist would brag about is the inherent limitations of the "objectivity" of story selection.

The best we can hope for is a better balance.

The best we can hope for, IMHO, is not better balance in pseudoobjective journalism but better appreciation by the audience of the arrogance inherent in claiming objectivity.

The problem as I see it is that viewpoint bias is invisible to anyone with the same point of view.

I admit that it is hard for people to fully discount their own perspective, but I assert that the arrogant among us don't think they have to try. Conservatives are innundated with the perspective of "objective" journalism, and it takes real work to parse out why that perspective exists - and the justification for conservatives to discount it.

[Blind Eye Jones]

If nobody can be unbiased or 'objective,' would you say that it makes sense to believe that NOTHING really matters but PR? In other words, if the truth is truly unaccessible go for power.