That's pretty incredible considering you guys consider every bit of negative news about the war, even from sources you ordinarily like if its for Covid19 (like the Daily Mail), to be part of some kind of conspiracy--even purely factual news about the defeat of Russian forces.
So, literally, the "consistent format" you are referring to is: "posts I do not like," otherwise you're just bulllshitting.
There is “news” and there is “narrative.”
News can be factually supported, fits into a wider context and set of truths, and eventually achieves public recognition and approaches non-falsifiability. Its an inductive process, very similar to the scientific process.
Certainly, there are actual events in this war, which are favorable and negative to both Ukraine and Russia. Did Russia lose a town called Lymon? It seems certain they did.
Then there is “narrative.” This is building the conclusion in advance. Disembodied events are then randomly applied to it non-systemic way.
A perfect example is climate change. The goal: convince everyone the world is undergoing specifically human-caused global heating. Completely disconnected and unverifiable news events are applied to it. Polar bears are drowning. The red wine harvest is bad. We have more hurricanes! We have fewer hurricanes! Regardless, its all “global warming.”
I see the exact same thing with Russia/Ukraine and it is over-the-top.