Or so it was until the latest bloodbath in Gaza, which is being so graphically covered by journalists that our masters are suffering a new experience.
It's not fear of being called anti-semitic, but fear of their own viewers – ordinary folk so outraged by the war crimes committed against the women and children of Gaza that they are demanding to know why – even now – politicians are refusing to treat their own people like moral, decent, intelligent human beings.
Yet still – every time another blood-soaked child appears on the screen – the news presenters talk about the "blame game".
BLAME GAME? Do they think this is a bloody football match? Or a bloody tragedy?
It goes like this. Civilians are killed.
Reporters call it "tank fire" (Hamas has no tanks).
Israel says it is a mis-fired Hamas rocket. Hamas says it is Israel's work. So it's a "blame game".
No one can actually BE blamed – and thus we can shrug off the responsibility and shake our head at it all.
How many times does the 'New York Times' expect its readers to tolerate editorials like last week's effort? There had been "deadly attacks" in Gaza, readers were told.
The total dead came to 750, "a vast majority being Palestinians".
And then the get-out: there were "competing charges" – Israel or Hamas or a Hamas ally – over the attack, and thus "what really matters now is that some way be found to stop this carnage".