November 28

This is paragraph 4 of the first section of the Editors' Code, which all of our national newspaper editors follow.
At election time, that rule is stretched to - and beyond - what might be regarded as its reasonable limits. We know which side our newspapers are on; readers expect some level of spin.But at what point should we draw the line and say "Enough!"?
Take today's story about documents relating to trade talks with the US, which Jeremy Corbyn says prove the "NHS is up for sale". Do they? That's a legitimate question for journalists to ask. In the news pages you'd expect a report of the claim and verdicts of expert and interested parties on the validity of that claim. 
Old school journalists might play it completely straight - as here:

But it is equally valid - if galling for Labour supporters - for a sceptical newspaper to focus on the rejection of the argument, rather than the claim itself. As the whitetops did today.

When it comes to the redtops, they are always likely to be a bit more aggressive. Was it a "sick joke" and a "stunt" as The Sun says? Is that fact or opinion dressed up as fact?
And what about the Mirror? Is that document "proof" that the NHS is "for sale", as it says. Medicines for the NHS were certainly mentioned in the paper, but there does not appear to have been any conclusion. What certainly hasn't happened is that the NHS has been "sold to vultures".

And so finally we come to the Telegraph. The headline below sits above the main inside story in its election coverage today. It is a news story, not an opinion piece, nor even a sketch. 
This cannot, by any measure, be regarded as a news headline. It doesn't give the reader a clue what it's about. It is entirely opinion. And it isn't even a good heading.