LA Times Now Unbiased?

laobserved gives some proof that the resignation of Howard Raines isn't lost on editor John Carroll. An internal Los Angeles Times memorandum shows action.

"I'm concerned about the perception---and the occasional reality---that the Times is a liberal, "politically correct" newspaper. Generally speaking, this is an inaccurate view, but occasionally we prove our critics right."

(snip)

The reason I'm sending this note to all section editors is that I want everyone to understand how serious I am about purging all political bias from our coverage. We may happen to live in a political atmosphere that is suffused with liberal values (and is unreflective of the nation as a whole), but we are not going to push a liberal agenda in the news pages of the Times.

Within the memo, Carroll takes to task an article (requires registration) concerning a Texas abortion law. The focus should not be on the law that is being commenting on, but on how on the law was reported. Journalism should place the merits of both sides of a case clearly before the readers for them to decide. Although it is nearly impossible to be completely unbiased, the striving for neutrality shouldn't be surrendered. And it shouldn’t be surrendered in the name of one’s own opinion of right.

If, perhaps, Carroll is serious and if, perhaps, the changes could be made, then the most important paper on the left coast would suffer dramatic changes. Can the reporters become unbiased in their writing? Can their editors keep close reign on their charges? More importantly, will the choice of what is covered and what is not also be unbiased? I have my doubts, but this is promising—at least I can probably keep my sub to the Times for now.