The BBC is very good at being fair and balanced.
The Sun's two pages of coverage could fairly be described as accurate and respectful with pictures of all 96 victims and it also runs an editorial "unreservedly" apologising to the families of the Hillsborough victims, just as the paper did 12 years ago and again on its front page four years ago.
The editorial adds: "The supporters were not to blame. But the police smeared them with a pack of lies which in 1989 the Sun and other media swallowed whole."
The paper adds that it hopes the families go on to get more than their "first measure of justice".
An online apology on the paper's website is much longer and is said to be "heartfelt, profound, sincere and unambiguous" and adds that the 1989 report is "without doubt the blackest day in this newspaper's history".
However this difference between print and online is getting to where this blog may be heading. My guess is that online there is so much opinion that even newspaper journalists have to be a bit mainstream, at least recognise what other people are thinking. In print they may still think they can define what the news agenda is and every reader will not know anything different.
Even over the next couple of months for example there could be enough online comment, some from outside the UK, that the Fleet Street Brexit line will have modified. At least in the online version. Time will tell.
I may be jumping around a bit. Not ignoring the Hillsborough story but for the purpose of this blog the main observation is that the Sun story about Cameron and Whatsapp has not gone anywhere. For example not mentioned in Guardian report on Times front pages.