Almost all journalists are advocates. In so many ways, big and small, their articles advocate for the status quo. They (rightly) take a skeptical look at any proposed changes (political/economic, criminal justice, etc.), but (wrongly) often do not take a skeptical look at the status quo. In this case, it's pretty easy to see them as advocates because they are pushing a newer way of doing things, but it is impossible for a journalist to maintain complete impartiality as we have to base our communication on a shared set of assumptions or it would be hard to write anything.
Almost all journalists are advocates. In so many ways, big and small, their articles advocate for the status quo. They (rightly) take a skeptical look at any proposed changes (political/economic, criminal justice, etc.), but (wrongly) often do not take a skeptical look at the status quo. In this case, it's pretty easy to see them as advocates because they are pushing a newer way of doing things, but it is impossible for a journalist to maintain complete impartiality as we have to base our communication on a shared set of assumptions or it would be hard to write anything.