The more online media and blogging takes over the less objective journalists seem to be. They seem to be competing with the blogs as well as one another to be the most interesting publication or network.
The most depressing case is Newsweek, which since 2003 had been my favorite magazine. It usually featured objective pieces and various writers. I loved reading it and not knowing which side of the issue the reporter was on, because it was THAT objectively written and great quality. However, ever since The Daily Beast took over and Jon Meacham left the publication is filled with subjective essays and it's all so opinionated. They take a very left stance and bash Republicans left and right. The publication is may as well just come out as a liberal "news" magazine and stop trying to put on the facade that it's the same quality journalism that it once had, but I will have a whole different blog post dedicated to Newsweek's changes and my disdain.
News publications and stations are supposed to be objective and report the facts. A newspaper has reporters and editors with different opinions, different ideals, different beliefs, etc. And when a newspaper, magazine, etc. endorses a candidate it is speaking on behalf of the entire company and can really make an impact on the way it is perceived by outsiders. I know there are people who immediately dislike a company once they find out the company gives money to or endorses something he or she is opposed to. The news is to be objective and is to report objectively. If the editor or a reporter wants to put their credibility and objectivity on the line by writing a column or an editorial (or a blog post) endorsing a candidate or speaking out in a way that takes a stance instead of being objective then that is their own ordeal, but their opinion should not be speaking on behalf of the entire company. Even if a majority of the company wants to endorse Obama, doesn't mean that the entire publication should come out and announce they are endorsing Obama. They will lose the readership that they had of people who may not have liked Obama, and it associates everyone who works for the publication with that opinion - even if someone working there is a hardcore Republican - by working for a publication which has endorsed someone they are opposed to it puts them under that shield.
Unless a publication wants to come out and just admit that the news and their articles aren't objective and they are openly taking a stance, which is a whole different topic which is definitely a risky move for publications.