According to a recent article published in the Washington Post, the Associated Press has acquired a new "boldness" that may be threatening its standing as "a neutral arbiter of the news" in addition to "challenging its relationship with its owners."

The article presents a series of headlines from this year:

"Is Edwards Real or a Phony?"
"Mitt Romney's victory in Michigan was a defeat for authenticity in politics."
"John McCain calls himself an underdog. That may be an understatement."

"Obama Walks Arrogance Line"
"Slick Hillary?"
"I miss Hillary."
"Biden pick shows lack of confidence."

The article goes on to ask if the AP is evolving into a competitor to the very newspapers that own it? Has it branched off from objective reporting to a more edgy style of writing that may cost it its future?

With the rise of the Internet, the process at the AP has changed; an analysis that used to take days is now expected to be finished on the fly because the AP is expected to be the first to report.

According to Dick Keil, a former AP reporter who spent 20 years working for wire services and now a political consultant; "It's like New Coke -- it seems cool now, but just wait. It could bring down the whole company: They have a recognized, respected and trusted brand and identity, and they are moving in a radically new direction likely to make the vast majority of their subscribers uncomfortable."

Benjamin Marrison, editor of the Columbus Dispatch prefers that the AP "cover the routine state legislature hearings and let us cover the analysis. They're now missing some of those kinds of hearings, forcing us to cover them. . . . [Some] think we've become the wire service to the wire service."

Source: Washington Post via Poynter