Speaking of balance, this by the beeb indicated that Depp won because juries are not clever enough to see through the tactics of lawyers, unlike his last case which just had a judge.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61673676
I caught a BBC bulletin yesterday, and came away with the impression that a lot of those interviewed felt he should have been found guilty, because that supports women bringing charges in the future, rather than the evidence in the case.
The beeb did balance it up by stating some details of Depp's win, a view from one of his supporters and a clip from his lawyer. But that didn't seem to be the main point they were trying to make.
I'd want to see victims of any crime supported, and there are discussions to be had regarding reporting rates through charges and outcomes. But this coverage seems more about getting an outcome that suits their narrative, than anything connected to the evidence or individual case.