with living in a media-rich society is that we are all exposed to a constant stream of news and opinion from many sources, and there's often not much to go on by way of deciding whether or not the source is reliable.
In days past everyone relied on newspapers for information, and this was presented at length and in great detail - often days after the events being reported had occurred. Then came radio, and later televison, and with them a greater sense of immediacy - the news was relayed into our homes daily, sometimes within hours of things happening. The BBC was the only broadcaster, and BBC news was taken as being fact - no ordinary person even dreamed of questioning it. The advent of multiple TV and radio stations has muddied the water as far as news reporting is concerned - now we can see and hear slightly different versions of the same news as it's gathered by many reporters, all of whom might be in the same place at the same time.
The internet has opened up the world as never before, and now anyone with access to a connection can read local and internation news on hundreds of sites, based all over the world. Everyone can have an opinion on more or less any news story, formed from information contained in several different reports.
Honest and trustworthy? Who knows, and how do you tell? One thing is for certain, if you want to get an idea about what really happened in a particular location and at a particular time it's best to gather your information from more than one source, and pass it through your commonsense and experience filters. News tends to emerge in dribs and drabs, and what is black and white today may be grey and off-white tomorrow.