Jacko -
As all those who have ever run across Mr Hewson will know, he is opinionated and a big fan of Gripen and the Swedish industry in general.
Now, before Pious Pilot has an apoplectic fit: That is not a bad thing. (The opinions, that is, not the fit, which might be quite OK.)
Journalists are supposed to be "objective". However, nobody can define what that term means. If you mean "never exercising any judgment on what anyone tells you" the news will get very confusing, since usually different people will tell you different things. Soviet journalists used to be "objective" in the sense that they uncritically repeated the official line.
In fact, it's part of the job to call bull
when necessary, and particularly when the bull
is obvious but nobody else is calling it. In the process you make judgments, formed on the basis of your background knowledge and experience. Those judgments are not readily distinguishable from opinions.
This is necessary in most aerospace/defense reporting because there are a lot of people out there whose business is to sell things. People who sell things tend to utter bull
in the process, whether they are the Avon lady or the marketing VP for Daddy Warbucks.
So rather than being "objective", professional integrity as a journalist (if you want to spout off about the use of the word "integrity" please go to Jet Blast and do it there) amounts to intellectual honesty - not pre-selecting the facts that support a view that you hold for other reasons that you don't disclose. It means being prepared to change your mind when the facts change (which they do). It means being prepared to defend your views, honestly and without personal rancor.
As for the Swedish piece, spend some time listening to them and watching them. Who else has delivered a bunch of fighters under budget, and handed the change back to the customer?
Now, that's change I can live with.