No. That is not the gold standard (although I would prefer the long-gone standards of the Times in separating news and comment). The principle (Thatcher started the rot) was to prevent the concentration of excessive media power within the same control, because it permitted exactly the corrupt use of influence that Berlusconi and Murdoch demonstrate. With enough TV/wireless/print media sources in hands that are independent of each other the public have access to a sufficient range of views that such influence is sufficiently improbable. No one medium needs to be apolitical if there are sufficient sources to negate the influence of any given medium - that is te possible virtue of the internet, but alas the amount of shit up there makes it almost impossible to find the gold or indeed to distinguish that gold from iron pyrites.

It's the same sort of principle as the old "no product placement" code which was also less corrupt than what we have now.

For my part I am (genuinely) puzzled that you sought to restrict a broker to ethical investments when the bulk of what you post appears to align you with the money-changers in the temple.