In cases like this, they'll still not listen. Golden Mean isn't a logical fallacy for journalists who likely get their income from paid advertisements off companies who have vested interests in this news never breaking, or at least, being taken seriously for now.

TAD would rather postpone making a decision until he is forced to shove an old lady overboard and climb into the lifeboat.

It is also possible that he doesn't have sufficient experience or information to make an informed choice. All he sees are "experts" who disagree, so he plays it safe and doesn't make a call at all. It takes time to really dig into it in detail and see who is just blowing smoke and who has the hard data to back up what they are saying.

The problem is that the media aren't making the smell test (does side B's argument make sense, to someone with more than a passing acquaintance with the issue?). In fact the media don't even try to screen out reasonable criticism from pure BS. And when they present two sides in a political debate, and one side resorts to clear easily proven lies, they just let that slide by as well.

This comment from the former owner of the Washington Post shows their real purpose:

All the President's Men is a wonderful work of fiction.

"We live in a dirty and dangerous world. There are some things the general public does not need to know and shouldn't. I believe democracy flourishes when the government can take legitimate steps to keep its secrets, and when the press can decide whether to print what it knows."
-- Katharine Graham at a 1988 speech at CIA headquarters

http://www.namebase.org/davis.html

I think the politics of P.O. make the discussion and subsquent debate even more complicated. I will endeavor
to draw a correlation. When the world was of the two
predominant political ideologies of communism and democracy,there was the argument and debate about which gave workers and citizens a better life. When the USSR fell the debate was over, and the democratic
USA didnt feel the need to continue to give artificial concessions to its workers and citizens after the USSR fell,because it felt that its workers now had no other
choice and it wouldnt be necessary.
As P.O. now becomes main stream and an accepted fact,
It's movement will also suffer as democracy has turned
evermore totalitarian and less free....so too will P.O.
become corrupted and constrained.
When P.O. becomes main stream and accepted and the debate seems won, the real battle is just beginning.
The intelligentcia and founders of the movement will be
erased from public memory. The govermental
leaders will act like they brought the proletariat to the ball and the dance will begin again.
Already the MSM is accepting the fundamentals of PO and
the MSM is nothing more then the official spokesperson
for the goverments globally. The goverments will grasp
the standard as soon as they see the proles grasping
the understanding of P.O.
Heck!!!....for all I know,this site is run by Cheney
right now.