The principle of the First Amendment is that we are entitled to our own opinions--and to publish those opinions on our own dime. The principle of "journalistic ethics" is that journalism on the high-speed printing press is too powerful to fall into the wrong hands, that it must be not someone's opinioon but objective. Sounds woonderful--we're entitled to the truth, so it claims--but the corrolary is that we are not entitled to publish because we might be wrong.
Thus the ethic of "objectivity" is directly at odds with the First Amendment. The distinction was somewhat academic before the advent of the FCC--but the FCC exists to censor out all but the few licensed broadcasters, and in principle to censor them (in that their licenses expire and require renewal "in the public interest" as judged by the FCC. The FCC created the broadcast bands by defining them and thereby defining the receiver characteristics which would pick up broadcasts.
The Internet breaks out of the mold of few-to-many defined by the FCC's licensing relatively few, relatively high-power stations instead of many, many low-powered ones. The Internet essentially gives all aspiring publishers a level playing field, and elitists have no great advantage. Like talk radio, the Internet is well suited to conservative commentary.
And congrats, TLBSHOW!