I would think both the audience and the station-owning companies are willing to allow long-term seasoned reporters who have "paid their dues" to share some of their observations. When someone sitting in the booth during the national convention of a political party in the process of nominating their candidate and kicking off the campaign says: "I have been on the broadcast team now for 11th time and I have NEVER seen that tactic used before by either party...." I take no offense. In fact, I surf the channels to see which group has a broadcast team that has maturity and a track record of "integrity in their observations".
That's fine, as long as it's not being done during a
newscast, where that person's one job is to
read the news. Period.
Sunday morning talking-head shows, convention and election coverage, the time after Presidential speeches (and opposition-party rebuttals), and the like are places for analysis and opinion. All the networks have people who are paid to give their opinion. Even those who normally just read the news are allowed to do so on occasion, in the right setting and context.
But opinions have no place whatsoever in the newscast itself - network or local. If someone is reading the news, I don't care what they think about it. Of course they have an opinion, but they must keep it to themselves when doing a job that requires objectivity, such as reporting or anchoring.
