It's the old problem that is also evident in public (as in state-owned) tv broadcasting. Should the news programs and journalists take sides and endorse the vie

It's the old problem that is also evident in public (as in state-owned) tv broadcasting. Should the news programs and journalists take sides and endorse the viewpoint that they believe best reflects facts? Or should they just report the various viewpoints that are present in society regardless of their value? In the first case, you run the risk of having a journalist using a public resource to advance his own point of view. In the second case you just end up being an echo chamber for what the politicians (who each represent a share of public opinion) want to say. Moreover, if you adopt the second approach, how much space do you give to each opinion, to avoid over or under-representing some? Proportional to the share of votes of the politician expressing it? I'm not saying there is a solution. But the idea that the value of opinions can be established objectively- or even determined by an algorithm- is a bit naive.