To complete my thought, the early engagement of journalist 'stringers' and spies evolved in to a somewhat natural marriage. As HUMINT declined in importance in Langley the marriage strengthened. It is broadly recognized now that news orgs depend on 'informed sources' in remote locations of the world; the days of 'stringers' is over... too tenuous and too expensive. Besides, the check usually didn't arrive until about 9 months later. You gotta pay your bar tab in Rawal Pindi.
So the point is, this relationship has always been somewhat of a natural. Yes, there have been times when the news desk was at loggerheads with the spooks; but that didn't really apply in the field. Now the news desks are owned by the same people who were reliable sources in the past - or closely connected to them.
The marriage pact became more natural. Common outcomes were identified - and there was $$$ and to spare. Thus we find journalists (Maggie Haberman?) using tradecraft to cover essentially clandestine activities. The marriage deepens as it becomes more lucrative.
Was truth ever much of a factor?
sure... i think...
:)