Gossips?

Just a quick thought -- if a newspaper just prints what various people say, isn't that just a gossip column?

During a political campaign, it's common for the media in general just to quote the candidates, to tell readers what the candidates (or their advisors) have to say about each other (most commonly) or some issue or other.

When the editorial staff wants to show some responsibility and respectibility, they do a "fact check," which is often little more than a scandal check against assertions the candidates have made.

No analysis of the positions or proposed programs.  Do they make sense?  Do they have good internal sense?  Are they based on reality?  What do they gloss over?  What do they assume?  Are those assumptions valid?

If a newspaper just gathers statements, then it's not much more than a conglomeration of opinions -- and opinions are pretty cheap no matter the source.

If people are just presented with a mass of opinions, they're bound to turn more towards those they like and away from those they don't like.  It's the nature of opinions, none are any more valid than any other, it's just a matter of taste and preference.

So, in this way the front page of a newspaper differs little from its op-ed page, and a newspaper differs little from talk radio.  No matter that the reporters and staff think better of themselves...