If I were a reporter at the P-I or, especially, the Times, I'd be wondering what my newspaper is hiding. That's the instinctive nature of skeptical journalists when people start going into court shouting "irresponsible," "scurrilous," "reckless" and "false!" as the Times did, or "needlessly" prying, as the P-I did. The newspapers are saying this about the effort by the Committee for a Two-Newspaper Town to review the papers' secret business deal, the new $49 million Joint Operating Agreement (JOA). The papers' protestations are so over the top that you can't help but ask, what are they scared of? Is it, say, not a deal to save the P-I after all? Is there a side agreement to eventually fold the papers into one and have they misled their readers about it? After all, why trust newspapers that campaign for sunshine laws and the exposure of inside deals but hypocritically practice the opposite in their corporate towers? Judge Greg Canova will rule shortly, perhaps today, on whether CTNT can get a gander at the papers' papers. As the publishers might say on their editorial pages (but don't, since JOA candor is not one of their callings), we hope the judge agrees the public has a right to know about the people who profess to protect the public's right to know.