The guy who thinks it's OK to slam reporters isn't misinformed. His knowledge of the facts completely matches the journalist's description. Where they differ is

The guy who thinks it's OK to slam reporters isn't misinformed. His knowledge of the facts completely matches the journalist's description. Where they differ is in their opinion of what is an appropriate response. Basically, OP argues that people who disagree with him haven't been preached to enough. This condescending article is more of a reason than an explanation for why people think it's OK to slam reporters. PolitiFact does the same thing. They take what is clearly an opinion and rate it: http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2015/dec/04/ted-cruz/ted-cruz-incorrectly-says-obama-forcing-boys-and-g/ http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2015/dec/04/ted-c... It's not some unsubstantiated claim from politicians that the press is lying. They're simply the closest to the action. Watching Youtube or Liveleak videos of various events posted on social media and then hearing about them on the news is how I have developed a lot of contempt for journalists and journalism. And it's not a new observation. Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the “wet streets cause rain” stories. Paper’s full of them. In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know. The Internet just made it easier to learn more about various subjects. You don't have to passively listen to some anointed fact-checkers, and you're not limited to your narrow area of expertise.