There are levels of reporting which means it is never as black and white as suggested by the original OP. However when you take these levels into account the O

There are levels of reporting which means it is never as black and white as suggested by the original OP. However when you take these levels into account the OP does make a point about '2 weeks later' you never hear about it. A better term would be 'selective reporting'. A good example of 'selective reporting' is when a story splashes over the from page of a newspaper, which then allows other news outlets to report on that front page, which means the story spreads far and wide. Some short time later, fearing a legal challenge or public backlash, the paper is forced to print a retraction (because their original reporting was wrong). That retraction happens in one inch of print, contained in one short sentence, hidden away on page 12. At that point the retraction is worthless and the original lie lives on. Edit: Thinking about this a bit more, I suspect the what original OP was trying to say and what I am trying to say can be easily summarized by the phrase 'fair and balanced reporting'. I think that type of reporting seems to be a thing of the past.