Isn't it another case of asymmetric warfare? People infuriated by a journalist's lie/misrepresentation (either actively or by omission) cannot counter it on-th

Isn't it another case of asymmetric warfare? People infuriated by a journalist's lie/misrepresentation (either actively or by omission) cannot counter it on-the-spot (how could they address material printed or broadcasted by mass-media?) and think that they can only aim at the source. Without any live report the journalist's comments are less convincing. Also: some consider journalists are representatives/relays of the powers-that-be.