Thinking about the mainstream media and how it fails to deal with authoritarianism

A matter of high importance strikes me as not reported or understood nearly enough is how the MSM deals with two very different concepts, conservatism and authoritarianism. In my opinion, (i) the MSM conflates the two concepts most of the time, and (ii) that amounts to a major failure of professional journalism. The MSM constantly fails to refer to DJT, MAGA politicians (election deniers, etc.), the Republican Party, Christian nationalism as authoritarian. That failure has great negative consequences for the survival of what is left of our fading democracy. In essence, the MSM normalizes and strengthens the radical American authoritarian wealth and power movement by usually referring to it as conservative.

Before the Republican Party radicalized and turned dominantly authoritarian some years ago, real conservatives supported and believed in democracy, the rule of law, civil liberties, pluralistic secularism, and facts, truths and sound reasoning, even when inconvenient. By authoritarian I mean some combination of (i) kleptocratic autocracy with DJT as the dictator, (ii) kleptocratic Christian nationalist theocracy, and (iii) kleptocratic, barely regulated plutocratic capitalism. This exemplifies what I mean about the GOP's radicalization and de-democratization, i.e., RINO hunting pro-democracy, pro-civil liberties Republicans out of the GOP and/or power:

In multiple important ways, the new GOP

is not much like the old GOP,

arguably it is more like the old Democratic Party

than the old GOP

Prominent Republicans and organizations like the Heritage Foundation and Federalist Society, the MSM still routinely refer to as "conservatives" or "conservative." Those people and groups are usually ones who openly oppose or reject democracy, the rule of law, civil liberties (abortion, voting rights, free and fair elections), pluralistic secularism, and inconvenient facts, truths and sound reasoning. There is no way that DJT or most major Republican state or federal politicians can reasonably be called conservative any more. They are authoritarian.

So why does the MSM persist in putting nice conservative lipstick on an obviously authoritarian pig? The only meaningful response to that criticism, which I have sent to dozens of journalists, editors and opinion columnists, is this: We have to stay neutral.

That's it. The one and only response I've ever received back. I got no response when I followed up with this: Since when and how is fact-based truth and/or sound reasoning not neutral? 

Qs: Is the MSM correct that it needs to stay neutral and calling what America's radical right is doing conservative, not authoritarian? In other words, is it factually incorrect to refer to America's radical right as authoritarian, regardless of how non-neutral the GOP and DJT would vehemently claim it is?