[coffeefirst]

Actually, I do.

You're wildly underestimating how rebellious newspaper editors are. If someone was messing with the reporting, everyone in DC would know, and you'd see remarkably detailed reporting on it throughout other parts of the press.

[smitty1e]

I would offer that the Project Veritas expose of CNN belies your assertion handily.

There is a mindset that dominates academia and carries on into the media.

It is reflected in the political donations of journalists.

And the distribution of the story bias.

It perhaps one should say "stunning lack of anything resembling a distribution".

[pstuart]

Of course academia is a "radical left" arena, as it's the domain of our youth and that is a natural expression of their view of the world.

All news has bias, but some are more biased than others, and that bias varies from personal and ingrained to organizational and intentional. It's important to be able to separate the wheat from the chaff, as it were.

Project Veritas is a right-wing, extremely partisan organization with a shady history. They are not an organization that I would trust.

[smitty1e]

Not to accuse James O'Keefe of sainthood, but I've an order of magnitude more regard for him and Veritas than any of the cable news networks.

[pstuart]

We're in dangerous political territory, so I'll preface my question in the context of being genuinely curious and not judgmental (of you).

My awareness of him is from several "stunts" where he "went undercover" and interviewed his targets surreptitiously and then dishonestly edited the results to support his ideological narrative.

I associate cable news with general incompetence, corporate shilling and whatnot, but generally a "noisy" signal. PV, on the other hand, is driven purely by right-wing ideological goals.