"There's a case to be made that while the press has no constitutional duty to be fair, there is a societal obligation to do so. The press is like no other industry in American society. Its importance is acknowledged in the Constitution and its liberty is part of our nation's foundation. Doesn't the press have a duty to live up to its special role in our democracy?"
In America, it's unusual not to have a system of checks. The President can be checked by the legislative branch which can be checked by the judicial branch, but the press falls outside of this.
We can get in trouble for wrongful information that gets printed/spoken, but not for being unfair. I doubt a trial would/could successfully prosecute a journalist for taking unfair advantage when asking a child questions, filming scenes of distress, or invading a celebrities privacy.
But doing these things are not right morally. One of our main ideals is to be objective, which we wouldn't do if we only present negative media because it's more newsworthy or we present a scandal and invade the personal lives of the public because it's newsworthy.
I don't want to sound preachy, but catch my drift? (Tokyo Drift)