Sadly, I think most (like 51% or so) of the news sources are still just reporting the news, but if it's a local Fox station the assumption is there is "conservative" spin among "liberals" and if it's not affiliated with Fox, Fox has done an absolutely outstanding job selling "conservatives" the idea that all other media has a "liberal" spin.
But CNN's regular news is pretty straight (albeit not that great), AP has spent its existence just reporting what facts it discovers and selling those unbiased stories to whatever media outlets need copy. So the regular outlets aren't really spun in their straight news reporting (not all of the shows that are basically televised columns) and the wire services still just report what's known and avoid adding assumptions about the motivation of statements or actions or expressing an opinion about.
Most news outlets still get fair representation from both sides of an issue to discuss a given issue. It's not the networks' fault if the conservative commentators or pundits come off looking like twits. Remember when Katie Couric had the unmitigated gaul to ask Sarah Palin what papers she read? Remember how she was vilified by the right for "attacking" the vice presidential candidate. Simple fucking question, but Palin wasn't smart enough to know the name of a paper...twit tripped over her own uninformed feet.
Yeah, journalistic standards are an endangered species. Here's a great take on it by Mr. Oliver, who despite being blatantly liberal hits the nail perfectly in this piece:
