Yeah, this is a thing that's been a problem for a while now, and not just with the NYT and WaPo. Media organisations will basically not fact check anything that

Yeah, this is a thing that's been a problem for a while now, and not just with the NYT and WaPo. Media organisations will basically not fact check anything that fits in with their worldview, which for the 'left wing' versions usually means: - Supports the idea that racism/nationalism/xenophobia is increasing cause of Trump/Brexit/whatever And the 'right wing' versions often means something similar about immigration and increased crime or political correctness. If a story fits those beats, then they'll often buy it without question, foregoing the basic background research needed in the process. That's why the Covington Catholic school kids thing got publicised so much; it fit very nicely (at first glance) with the idea that Trump voters are racist/horrible people, seemingly showed a confrontation between them and a native American tribesperson and helped the narrative many organisations wanted to push. Same with the case of that guy being 'thrown off a plane for speaking Arabic'. He wasn't, but the story fit the whole 'hate against Muslims increased after Trump election' narrative. Any fact checking at all would debunk these stories and the 'message' being pushed on social media sites, yet it wasn't done until way later. Same goes with another story I saw about a trans eSports team supposedly getting banned from a gender specific tournament. Team didn't actually exist and the story was a troll job meant to rile up one side, but media sympathetic to said side bought it hook, line and sinker. Honestly, a good journalist needs to be more skeptical about stories they agree with than disagree with (or at least equally so), and it's clear that most today aren't like that at all.