I’d buy into a Krugmanism on this issue and refer to the non-partisan commentator type. For Krugman its when non-partisanship is stretched beyond reason deep into being blind and saying there all as bad as each other when patently enough its one party the US Republicans being the problem.
Here in our free state the media, despite its strong bias towards Sinn Fein in all other matters (ahem) pushes a both sides are responsible and why cant everybody pull their socks up. It is indeed a part that the fear of loyalist violence* plays a part but in the main I think its they are conditioned to report on the basis that loyalism is a reactionary instinct cause it has to be the Provos deep down.
The idea that, you know, there is large section of loyalism which is simply bonkers, bigoted and irrational is of course not a story about shared spaces and harmony.
Look at the Examiner paper which bemoaned SF for its role in the protests but never mentioned that it was the holy order of the Alliance which put the motion forward.
You have what might be called a cluster F*ck where free state media are caught between the following:
Loyalists react and its Republicans who started it,
All that the Alliance party does is just,
the SDLP, amen, are the true voice of reasonable catholics.
Now when Loyalists rampage on their own for weeks in response to an Alliance motion backed by SDLP and SF then naturally enough getting a true picture within the stated constraints is not going to happen.
People are likely saying yes because they arent being told the full picture