Passage Summary: The word 'loophole' carries a lot of negative baggage and makes a reporter sound like they are taking sides. Because of this, reporters shouldn't use it unless they have the facts to back up the implied accusation.

Conclusion: News reporters should avoid using the word 'loophole' unless they can prove wrongdoing occurred.

Reasoning: The word 'loophole' is a biased term that suggests scandal and makes news reports look like opinion pieces.

Analysis: This argument moves from a descriptive premise (the word is loaded and partisan) to a prescriptive conclusion (reporters should not use it). To justify this reasoning, we need a principle that bridges that gap. Look for a rule stating that reporters have a duty to avoid partisan language or that they should not use words that imply unproven misconduct. The ideal principle will link the 'editorial-like' nature of the word to a prohibition on its use in objective reporting.