I would disagree with some of that infographic. Specifically, the middle section. Like NPR and the BBC have both a political and cultural bias. The BBC has admitted its own bias on many occasions. NY Times, Washington Post, both have their agenda as well. 

 
This was 2014.  I read somewhere (couldn't find it fast enough) that this is now only FOUR (I know CBS and Viacom did some kind of combining, don't know who else got combined).
 
I watched a video where the same news item was read word-for-word, tone inflection for tone inflection by no less than 30 different stations.  So, obviously the same writers for all of them.
 
I call all of them "the Great Distraction" and haven't had a TV for a year now (and don't miss anything except a few sports and science shows).

Voda La Void
I live in Oklahoma and on the day of the Oklahoma City bombing, it only took a few moments for the local news stations to put a graphic in the lower right corner of an mushroom cloud with red lettering being blown up "Terror In The Heartland" like a movie advertisement. You'd think they were running a commercial for a bad Bruce Willis flick.
 
They loved it.  Couldn't me more excited 168 people were killed and we were all glued to the tube trying to find out what was happening.
 
The media has always been honest, we just don't listen.  They have always told you that they tell "stories".  Not facts, not events, not accurate information about what's happening around you - stories.  They tell stories.  Everything is a narrative, complete with drama, good guys, bad guys, conflict and end game.  
 
And that's how it reads.  Caricatures, not people.  Archetypal good and bad, cardboard characters. Like children writing about adults.  Never understood why the media is revered for anything.  They sell stories and drama for profit.  Corporate profits off of others misery and human failure.  

Strangers writing about other strangers to be read by yet more strangers.  Nobody knows anybody - everyone in all their complexity and life span are reduced to a handful of paragraphs by a stranger who's mission is to tell a story for profit.

Put well

Remember the 90's?
 
The Rodney King riots and racial tensions, war in the ever unstable Middle East, people who'd been involved with Salman Rushdie's book "The Satanic Verses" being hunted down and killed by extremists...
 
We've come a long way, haven't we?
 
That's why I try and don't pay much attention to "the news". Most of that stuff only distracts us.

Much of the problem with the "news" today is directly traceable to late 60's/early 70's. Prior to this time period, the news bureau was considered a separate division from the entertainment bureau, and most were run at a loss to the network. That began to change in the 60s, first with the local news ("If it bleeds, it leads") and then at the national level. IIRC CBS was the first network to require the news bureau to 'make money'. So the focus changes, and now you need more viewers to sell more advertising to make a profit. Carry this attitude to the logical end destination and you have what we are experiencing today. 'Pretty people' who can only say what is on the teleprompter and can't think to put two words together to save their life. 'Stories' that aren't news but will get people to tune in based on the promo. Good history on this here - http://www.medialit.org/reading-room/whatever-happened-news
 
I worked on the ambulance in DC in the 80s/90s during the height of the drug wars in town. Hated the news media. They were always in the way when you tried to get on the scene or leave out with a patient. Always sticking the camera in your face or the back of the ambulance. Of course, when the drug wars were in a slow cycle, they would create 'news' by calling 9-1-1 and timing (with a stop watch) how long it took the ambulance to show up, then describe just how terrible us paramedics were. And if the fire chief or medical director said anything in our defense, well the media would go after them as well. To say they had an agenda would be an understatement.
 
Is it any wonder no one believes the media anymore. What I wouldn't give to have Walter Cronkrite (the "most trusted man in America") back on the tube! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Cronkite
 

sharke
I would disagree with some of that infographic. Specifically, the middle section. Like NPR and the BBC have both a political and cultural bias. The BBC has admitted its own bias on many occasions. NY Times, Washington Post, both have their agenda as well. 

Indeed. 
 
I was just reading - a police officer was killed in a coordinated terror attack in Jerusalem yesterday - which, by the way, has been claimed by ISIS. The BBC reported that "3 Palestinians (were) killed after a deadly stabbing". No mention of the police officer and a remarkably misleading headline.
 
Back in the 90s, my ex-wife's father worked for CBC, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, which we used to hold as one of the more objective networks. When I saw how he prepared for his morning show, how he picked angles and chose and edited news that he was to present, I lost all my illusions about the news ever being semi objectives.
 
Incidentally, he is the one who's responsible for me being a Cakewalk user. He gave me the NFR copy of Cakewalk Guitar Studio he'd just received for review. After I'd used it for a while, he asked me what I thought, filled in some paper that came with it and sent in his review. 
 
 

sharke
.... the BBC have both a political and cultural bias. The BBC has admitted its own bias on many occasions.

Much of the BBC News coverage is becoming unwatchable James. Not just because of their obvious left-leaning bias, but their ever-increasing insistence on a sanitary politically correct reporting style.
 
I watched a recent report on the London Bridge attacks and not once during the 7 or 8 minute piece to camera were the words I***m or M****m mentioned.
 
I don't understand how we've ended up in this position, or how in future we're ever going to be able to defeat an enemy that can not even be named.

Wow - the post I'd just made disappeared!
 
Take 2...
 
I was just reading about a police officer who'd been stabbed and died of her wound after a coordinated attack in Jerusalem (which, by the way, has been claimed by ISIS). The BBC reported that "3 Palestinians (were) killed after a deadly stabbing."
 
No mention of the young police officer and a remarkably misleading headline.
 
If that's objective...

Apparently someone from the Sun pretended to be related to one of the victims so he could get to him in the hospital for an interview.
 
The Sun are denying this though. 

I too would disagree with the news org chart. The Clinton News Network should be much more lower left. MSNBC could also not be considered balanced. IMHO, they are more lower left too.
 
As to ISIS claiming responsibility... If someone stumps their toe ISIS will claim to have orchestrated the attack. It may likely be their downfall though too. If I were a terrorist I wouldn't have claimed the bombing of little girls. I think that one will bite them in the ass. No one in their right mind, regardless of religious or political beliefs, can condone those types of acts. None are acceptable but that one was lower than low.