Wouldn't you also expect journalists to scrutinize things? As in skeptically question basically everything that's reported to them, and leave the drawing of conclusions up to their viewers? I think the scrutiny steps seems to get skipped, and each news outlet just reports the conclusions they want their viewers/readers to be exposed to.
I agree. I remember when news organizations had correspondents who travelled around the world to report on stories. People like Marie Colvin, who would risk their lives to get a story. Now it's all talking heads sitting around a table, telling you what to think. The stories aren't even real in many cases now, but made up hysteria like the nascar noose.
>BTW, I regularly read both the WSJ and the NYT. Reading both gives one a good idea about how agenda driven the media is.
May I suggest reading RT and the SCMP while you are at it. Maybe round it out with with some Al Jazeera.
I find it deeply ironic that Russia can run a news network that acts as a propaganda weapon by just talking about all the scandalous topic that American media wont touch (US war in Yemen, CIA black sites, Hunter Biden emails, Saudi government involvement in 9/11, CIA dumping billions of $ of weapons into the hands of ISIS, etc).
BTW, I regularly read both the WSJ and the NYT. Reading both gives one a good idea about how agenda driven the media is.