The press don’t get to make up the stories. They need to be held to truthful reporting. For opinion articles they cannot slander.
Why would it be in America’s interest to have a press that suppresses the truths they don’t want us to know and is free to lie to control the narrative? Does Obama spring to mind? For shame. If we want to hold the press to the truth we have something to hide?
Balanced journalism, factually based with the pluses & minuses spelled out is accurate journalism. Nothing says they can’t print something negative, but if they make it up or tell half truths to change the meaning like all those partial quotes then they need to be called out and if egregious enough there need to be consequences. The press are no more angels that the rest of us, without consequences they will not moderate their behavior.
So you want elected officials deciding what’s accurate or not? What government agency should we set up to enforce this? You point England as an example we should follow? What happens to a reporter in England who writes ill warning of the dangers of Islam? Or Homosexuality? They risk fines or jail. No thanks. I want the government out of regulating speech. The press’s abusive biasness and irresponsible reporting has been picked up by the American people and they are shutting them off in droves. CAIR also has stated that free speech doesn’t cover irresponsible speech. Translated means they want to silence speech they don’t like
The arguments you’re making are the same the left uses in arguing for the reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine in order to silence opposition