You’ve seen the headlines. They’re designed to make your blood boil or your heart skip a beat. Most of the time, we just scroll past, but every now and then, a story sticks. It feels true because it fits what we already believe about the world. But then, three days later, a quiet correction appears at the bottom of a page nobody visits. The damage is done. Honestly, lies from the media aren't always mustache-twirling villainy; sometimes they’re just the result of a 24-hour news cycle that values speed over accuracy. But whether it’s a sloppy mistake or a deliberate narrative push, the impact on how we see reality is massive.
We live in an era where "breaking news" is often just "breaking speculation."
The Anatomy of a Modern Media Myth
Remember the Covington Catholic High School incident in 2019? That’s a textbook case of how the media can sprint in the wrong direction. Major outlets like The Washington Post and CNN portrayed a group of teenagers as the aggressors in a confrontation with a Native American elder. The video clips were short. They were punchy. They went viral because they fueled a specific social narrative.
But then the full footage came out.
It turned out the situation was way more complex, involving a third group of instigators and a lot of nuance that the initial reports completely ignored. The kids weren't the ones who initiated the conflict. Lawsuits followed. Settlements were reached. But for millions of people, that first impression—that lie by omission—is the only thing that stuck. That’s the thing about lies from the media; the first version of the story is the one that brands itself into the collective consciousness.
It’s not just politics. It’s everything.
Take the "Satanic Panic" of the 1980s. News programs like 20/20 ran segments that convinced parents there was an underground network of cults kidnapping children. There was zero evidence. None. But the media loved the ratings. People went to jail for crimes that literally never happened because journalists prioritized sensationalism over boring, factual investigative work. We like to think we’re smarter now, but we just swapped the "Satanic Panic" for new, digital-age scares.
Why Does This Keep Happening?
Money.
The business model of modern journalism is broken. In the old days, you bought a newspaper or paid for a cable subscription. Now, it’s all about the "click." If a headline is 100% accurate but boring, you won't click it. If a headline is 10% true but 90% outrageous, it generates revenue. Most journalists aren't trying to lie to you, but they are under immense pressure to produce "content" every single hour.
When you’re writing five articles a day, you don't have time to call fifteen sources. You curate. You aggregate. You take what someone else said and put a spin on it. This creates an echo chamber where one wrong report from a single source gets amplified by fifty other outlets within an hour. This is how lies from the media become "common knowledge" before anyone even checks the facts.
There's also the problem of "Access Journalism."
If a reporter at a major network wants to get an interview with a high-ranking government official, they can't be too critical. If they burn that bridge, they lose their access. So, they report what they’re told, even if they suspect it’s a half-truth. We saw this clearly during the lead-up to the Iraq War. Major outlets like The New York Times published reports about weapons of mass destruction based on "anonymous sources" within the government. Those sources were wrong. The media acted as a megaphone for those errors, and the consequences were global.
The "Deepfake" Era and the Death of Seeing is Believing
We've entered a terrifying new phase. It used to be that you could trust a photo or a video. Not anymore. With AI-generated imagery and sophisticated editing, the media can now show you things that didn't happen with photographic "proof."
I’m talking about "Cheapfakes" too.
A "cheapfake" is just a real video that’s been slowed down or cropped to make someone look drunk, angry, or mentally unfit. We see this used against politicians on both sides of the aisle. The media picks up the clip because it’s "trending," and by the time the original, unedited video is found, the narrative has already shifted. It’s a lazy form of dishonesty, but it works incredibly well.
How to Spot the B.S.
You have to be your own editor. It's annoying, I know. You just want to read the news and move on with your day. But if you care about the truth, you have to do the legwork.
- Check the "Loaded" Language. Does the article use words like "slams," "eviscerates," or "baseless"? Those are emotional triggers. They aren't factual descriptors. If an author is telling you how to feel about a quote instead of just giving you the quote, they’re manipulating you.
- Look for the Original Source. Most news stories are just "reporting on a report." If Site A says that Site B heard from a source, go find Site B. Often, you'll find that the original story was much more cautious than the viral version.
- Follow the Funding. Who owns the outlet? Is it a massive conglomerate with ties to specific industries? This doesn't mean everything they say is a lie, but it gives you a "bias map."
- The 24-Hour Rule. If a story seems too "perfect"—meaning it perfectly fits your political leanings and makes your "enemies" look like monsters—wait 24 hours. Usually, within a day, the counter-evidence starts to leak out.
What Really Happened With the "Russian Bounties"?
Remember the story about Russia offering bounties to the Taliban to kill American soldiers? It was a bombshell. It dominated the news for weeks in 2020. It was used in debates. It was cited as a reason for specific foreign policy shifts.
Then, months later, the U.S. intelligence community admitted they only had "low to moderate confidence" in the report. Basically, there wasn't enough evidence to prove it was true. But if you ask the average person today, they still think it’s an established fact. This is the most dangerous kind of lies from the media—the ones that are based on intelligence "leaks" that can't be verified by the public. We are forced to trust the reporter, who is trusting a source, who might have their own agenda.
Understanding the "Gell-Mann Amnesia" Effect
The late Michael Crichton talked about this. It’s the idea that you can read an article about a subject you know intimately—say, your specific hobby or profession—and realize the reporter got everything wrong. You laugh at how incompetent they are. Then, you turn the page to a story about a subject you don't know, like the economy of Peru or a new scientific discovery, and you suddenly believe every word.
Why do we do that?
We assume that the media is only "bad" at the things we personally understand. The truth is, if they’re getting the small stuff wrong in your backyard, they’re probably getting the big stuff wrong on the global stage too.
Actionable Steps for a Cleaner Information Diet
You can't stop the media from lying, but you can stop being a victim of it.
✨ Don't miss: Is CBS Right or Left? The Truth About the Network's Real Political Lean
First, diversify. If you only read the Wall Street Journal, you're getting a specific slant. If you only watch MSNBC, you're getting another. Read both. The truth is usually buried somewhere in the middle of the two conflicting reports.
Second, use tools like Ground News or AllSides. These platforms show you how different outlets are covering the same story. It’s eye-opening to see how a "peaceful protest" on one channel is a "violent riot" on another.
Third, support independent journalism. Look for journalists on Substack or independent platforms who have a track record of admitting when they’re wrong. The biggest red flag in media isn't a mistake; it's the refusal to admit a mistake was made.
Stop sharing headlines after only reading the first sentence. We are all guilty of it. We see something that confirms our bias, and we hit "share" to show our friends we were right. When we do that, we become part of the machine that spreads lies from the media.
Verify before you vilify.
The media landscape isn't going to fix itself. The incentives are skewed toward drama and conflict. As long as we keep clicking on the rage-bait, they’ll keep making it. The only way to win is to stop playing the game and demand a higher standard of evidence before we give a story our attention or our anger. Check your sources, wait for the full clip, and always ask: "Who benefits from me believing this?"