Here's an example of how slanted the reporting of Covid-19 is. This is a news article from CBS on how the vaccine may help 'long haulers' who are suffering long term effects from the virus:

https://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2021/04/20/covid-long-haulers-symptoms-vaccine-survivors-corp-poll/

'Poll: 46% Of COVID Long-Haulers Had Improved Symptoms After Getting Vaccine'

Most will just read the headline and perhaps accept it on face value. If you read the article itself however:

"The group Survivors Corp polled 962 long-haulers and found 46% said they remained the same after the vaccine, 14% felt worse and 39% improved after the shot."

So in reality, '60% of respondents reported either no improvement or worsened symptoms from the vaccine'.

It would be interesting to document just how often sub editors are imposing very different meanings on articles and if they always favour the media organisation's preferred narrative…