It's a destructive form of virtue signaling. Practitioners of both-sidesing seem to think it shows some kind of open-mindedness or more serious thinking.
Exactly! Being 'both-sided' is the easiest and lamest way to avoid criticism for being ill-informed and to come off as snobby, like someone who's above the conflict.
How morally bankrupt is so called reporting about war crimes committed by Russians in Ukraine by ‘journalists’ of both sides’ dogma
The problem goes deeper, I think. Both-siding can be a procedure with is satisfied with presenting two sides. Then it is thoughtless. It can also be a step in aiming for truth by checking one's own argument with a counterargument. The problem is that public discourse rarely aims at truth.
Comments
How morally bankrupt is so called reporting about war crimes committed by Russians in Ukraine by ‘journalists’ of both sides’ dogma