Those agendas, as conceived and implemented, however, fall along a continuum between "subconscious" (i.e., kneejerk/ingrained political and/or worldview generated) to "intentional" (by design, through twisting or omitting "facts").
All are reactionary, according to the biases of individuals and corporations, and the opinionated soupy sea all sail.
If I want news that is presented with the least intentional bias, I'll hit CNN. . . though it, too, falls prey to some personalities' propensity for political prejudice through the weight of presentation, and on occasion injection of personal opinion in "news" accounts.
BBC is good for outside and more global perspective, though it has its own presumptions in presentation.On the extreme end of the continuum, then, albeit from different worldviews, are Fox and MSNBC -- both spewing propagandized "news" in volume and hyperbole that would even make Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's PR man, stand in cynical awe.
The quandary for an electorate in need of being accurately informed is epic in this Information Age: Due to the politicization of most of our "news" sources, individual research -- and skills to know truth from half-truth or no-truth -- is essential . . . but rarely done.
That leads to ill- and un-informed citzens, polarized, left and right, by their ignorance.
