The problem with "articles" such as the one under discussion is that information veracity is inherently subjective, assuming no true perfect framing of the info

The problem with "articles" such as the one under discussion is that information veracity is inherently subjective, assuming no true perfect framing of the information (such as is the case with history), and therefore the truth will be under the type of constant debate that breathes life into democratic societies. To my point and yours, such articles are unlikely to be referencing falsehoods presented by corporate media but instead contrary views. Which means that the hypothetical "ignoring" curriculum that the authors suggest would devolve into, if not start as, lessons in how to ignore most else but the corporate media view. Given the dogma that ostensibly serves to reinforce democracy in ideal conditions but has obviously instead enforced oppression in every other environment: that the media is the primary and honest arbiter of truth.