Would it kill the Los Angeles Times to do REAL reporting?

Apparently the answer is: Yes.

Their article on the "The Path to 9/11" is FAIR and BALANCED. That means they talk about "alleged" inaccuracies, rather than actually stating that there are inaccuracies. Because, after all, it would be BIASED journalism, and not journalism at all, if the reporter for the Los Angeles Times, his editor, or a college intern, picked up a free copy of the 9/11 Commission Report online and simply read the pages that flatly contradict the Disney/ABC film. Hell, I've even cited which pages of the report prove that the film is wrong.

No, that would entail actual reporting and actually giving your readers the facts. And real journalism nowadays isn't about giving your readers facts, it's about giving them what both sides claim, even if you know that one side is correct and have the evidence to prove it. You don't tell your readers that. You simply sit on your fat ass and call everything alleged.

The Los Angeles Time is one of the most important newspapers in America. And their shoddy journalism is symptomatic of the larger problem with news in America today. Reporters know the truth, they know how to find the truth, but they refuse to report the truth because somewhere along the way it became "biased" to include the truth.

Pathetic.