IMHO, it goes a little deeper than the journalist being the liar, but rather the agenda that his/her organization is behind. Most people in college who want to get into journalism probably have noble intentions, and when they get involved with the MSM they realize that though their intentions may be good, ultimately approval of their "stories" has to get approved by upper management which in turn may very well be the puppet masters behind the curtains . . .
could be.
I would tend to agree that the level of ineptitude, incompetence and stupidity would take more than one person to accomplish.
It would seem plausible that most journalists quickly realize that reporting equal sided information without a slant is not a good way to keep a job if they are employed by CNN, CNBC, FOX, NBC, Time Warner, etc etc
I assign a probability of believablity index which is inversely proportional to position on the food chain.
In other words...if the local newspapers runs an article about something that happened locally, observed by locals and written about by the local papers journalist...
meh...It might be true...fifty/fifty chance.
If the article is written by any of those that you mentioned...on the national level.
nope...almost a hundred percent chance that it's a lie.
Like that approach. Noticed the same IME w local journalism versus national.
im new follow me