Right. Like I said, good luck with that. Don't go sailing too far out. You'll fall off the edge, evidently. Lots of tough talk in your post. Not a single bit of evidence. But hey, who needs evidence when everything in life is self-evident, right?
Some very cold hard truth from a former working journalist. Our hardest battle about getting it right is to get ourselves out of our own stories. I was constantly on the watch for bias, for what I wrote professionally. I said former. This is behind me now. I repent and will try to overcome that innate shyness. The second cold fact about journalism is this. Right, left, sideways, upside-down, the views do not matter nearly as much as they are now permanent. Well, as long as the storage media survives. Honest journalists remember what regular folks may easily consider WAY too self-important, but it's actually true. Newspapers (right or wrong) are personal opinions of the writer, his/her/its editor, and also one more factual thing. It's also the first draft of history. John Peter Zenger remains the iconic early pioneer for freedom of the press. Whether his views of that day matched that government (they didn't), or whether they paved the way for a more vigorous assault on supposed governmental superiority (it did), it did allow opinion and news to merge. Early newspapers are riddled with it, unashamed by it, glorying in it if they wish to sway lethargic readers. I'd rather see our press wrong but free, not kneeling to a modern-day Elmer Davis or other censors.
Your claims continue to be false. The evidence is all around you, in the indisputable absence of any climate "crisis" or "emergency." All evidence ultimately rests on the self-evident evidence of our senses.
How to solve the media problem? Move to Russia, China or North Korea Free Speech is not wanted in Trumps America