Yes, top editors take their cues from the New York Times then do 'a local slant' but those leads from the New York Times and Washington Post are generated in Democrat War Rooms fueled by opposition research pros.
We can play off the book, "What's the Matter With Kansas" - "the great political mystery of our day: Why do so many Americans vote against their economic and social interests?" (https://www.amazon.com/Whats-Matter-Kansas-Conservatives-America/dp/080507774X)
Then ask - 'why do so many journalists write against their own economic and social interest'? Why would a 'news' person inject bias into their writing? Why NOT leave that to opinion writers? Why not BE professional... especially when 'jobs for journalists' are on the line?
1) Journalism schools teach that it is impossible for a writer to avoid injecting biases into his observations. Therefore, why try? It's okay to be a bigot; you can't help yourself. Just make sure you're a LIBERAL bigot or we'll fire your a$$ faster than you can type "The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog."
2) Even if a reporter tried to be objective, his editors would either insist that he rewrite the story to be more slanted, or they would take it on themselves to inject the bias. Or they would simply spike the story and yell at the reporter for not producing.
3) Reporters don't go into journalism to report the news. They go into those careers because they're too stupid to get real jobs, and because journalism is (formerly) a safe haven for left-wing social engineers and "activists" who "want to make a difference." They're advocates, not observers.
You will NEVER convince today's crop of imitation journalists that their job is to report news objectively. They can't be changed; they must be destroyed.
Sure, it will eventually mean not only the end of their jobs, but the demise of the entire Fourth Estate. But remember, these are not very bright people, and worse, they're crusaders who think that their sacrifice is worth it if it's for "the Cause."