Generally I agree with er2 that SCMP has its bias and HKFP does too, but that overall HKFP is closer to doing what the media should do. I think the coverage of the recent DC by-election is a good example of the subtle types of bias that are present. Shri is right it was reported by SCMP in the end and SCMP reported it fairly accurately. So if we compare the reporting of HKFP and SCMP on this one event:-
Timing: HKFP day after election, first edition; SCMP two days later
Placment: HKFP front page; SCMP small column at bottom of 4th page of City Supplement
Missing information: SCMP fails to inform readers that the incumbent, now serving prison time for fraud, belonged to a pro-establishment party the Business Professionals Alliance. In general HKFP provides much more complete information in the text and also has many pictures and a video.
Analysis: HKFP fails to do any analysis or mention this was probably a one-off due to the split non-democrat vote. In contrast, SCMP starts and finishes with this point and goes to the trouble to find two political experts to affirm it. However, SCMP is careful not to analyse further by speculating whether there was a split in the pro-establishment camp and why it might be unusual to have two serious 'independent' candidates in Hong Kong.
While this is very subjective, I believe the HKFPs "Despite labeling himself as independent, Ho Man-kit was backed by pro-Beijing legislators during the by-election" is more accurate than SCMP which rather glosses over this and the fraud which caused the by-election, making both seem quite natural.
What is frustrating for me is the lack of questions that need to be asked about why LO stood after his father was convicted, how he managed to get so many votes despite this, whether older LO is still a member of the BPA, why BPA did not put up a replacement candidate, whether there is a rift between BPA and the other pro-establishment parties, why Regina, Starry and others were campaigning for the 'independent' HO, who paid for HO's campaign and whether the DAB party machine and others canvassed for him.
Overall, they are minor things that only a news nerd or politics nerd will care about. But over time it builds up to a misleading world view, especially for casual readers who maybe only skim the first 2-3 pages and the opinion pieces/letters page.
A few years ago I followed the CE election with some interest, but not obsessively. My only source was the SCMP and while I knew about Henry Tang's wine collection and CY's desire to address social issues, I somehow was completely unaware that CY was rumored to be a member of the CCP, had strong links with the mainland or had talked about using force to suppress the 2003 A.23 protests. I think the SCMP must have mentioned this, but only in small out of the way articles hidden away somewhere, or only on days I did not read the paper.