Then we're right back to the original question:
> How does it not undermine a paper's journalistic ethics to be neutral and fair?
> How does it not undermine a paper's journalistic ethics to be neutral and fair?
Why do you think that readers don’t understand that?
If they had tried to disguise opinions as journalism by introducing intentional bias and distortion into a story, then that would be a problem. But newspapers have published opinions for ages.
Assuming neutrality isn't something that we should expect newspapers to value, then I think transparency is an good alternative. A presidential endorsement can be a good thing in that the newspaper staff are being openly transparent about their political bias.