So, everyone seems to be jumping to the conclusion that since Fox News did not immediately publish a rambling letter sent by a former Ensign staffer that made incendiary allegations against Ensign, that Fox News was engaged in a "cover up" of a Republican scandal.
While we don't know all the facts, and while Fox News has about as bad a reputation as possible when it comes to fairness, I don't think that allegation is fair based on what we know.
First, when a news organization receives an unsolicited letter that makes incendiary allegations against a public figure, the responsible thing to do is not to publish the letter, but rather to investigate the allegations. Part of any responsible investigation would involve contacting the subject of the accusations (here, Senator Ensign), for comment.
So Fox News receives a letter on or after June 11 (although the letter is dated June 11, if it were sent by regular mail it would be received after that). Doesn't it seem plausible that when Fox News received the letter, it began an investigation of the accusations, and contacted Senator Ensign for his side of the story? And doesn't it then seem plausible that when Senator Ensign heard that Fox News was investigating his affair with a former staffer, he decided that rather than wait for a Fox News report to be aired, he should preempt it by making a public statement himself? And doesn't it then seem plausible that his press conference on June 16th, only five days after the date of the letter, was in fact the end result of the aforementioned chain of events?
I realize Fox News has done and continues to do a lot of bad things. But here, the accusation that they are involved in a cover-up is not supported by any evidence. Rather, the evidence is consistent with responsible journalistic behavior.
(Of course, more facts may come out. But based on what we know so far the above seems to be the most plausible version of events).