of course there's no such thing as 'completely actual and factual press report' any more than there is a perfect glider pilot.

the question is what happens when things go wrong. Responsible journalists and outlets continue to self-criticize and correct. if you have never seen such a thing, the NY TImes' Public Editor is one example:

http://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.co...public-editor/



On Thursday, April 2, 2015 at 8:30:06 AM UTC-4, Don Johnstone wrote:
At 21:26 31 March 2015, Bob Pasker wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2015 at 8:30:13 AM UTC-4, Don Johnstone wrote:

As far as I am aware the investigators in both cases have not
reached any conclusion. The media have, but their priority is
increasing
their profits, not ascertaining the truth.

that's a fairly cynical view of the media, and although there's plenty of
that going on, responsible media organizations (not their ad businesses)
report news, and their priority is scoops, not profits.

--bob

OK if I accept your assertion that their priority is scoops, how does that
increase the veracity of their stories? I would contend that it does
exactly the opposite and in any case the "scoop" is very definitely linked
to their increase in income and therefore profit.
There is no such thing as a completely accurate and factual press report
and honest reporters are as rare as rocking horse turd.