It's even worse than that.

First of all, you know something happened and want to see the take of different journalists regarding the issue.  No luck: you visit a number of news websites, and exactly the *same* story is shown in every single one of them.  So really, news websites act like RSS aggregators with a fancy CSS stylesheet.  And what's the value that each of them bring to the table that makes them unique now?  The CSS stylesheet?

Besides the fact that this means only a very few people are actually writing anything, with the danger that in the long run we would be more exposed to the bias of the particular few, it gets even worse.  Let's say you go to www.jpl.nasa.gov and read a news article written by JPL the day it was published in their website.  Five days later, you see the same bit of news appear in e.g. CNN, only mangled out of shape and with several inaccuracies and other problems.

Something that can be particularly disgusting are the beautified on screen graphic style sheet news shows apply to data from www.nhc.noaa.gov, the national hurricane center.  If you go to the NHC's website, you can keep track of the latest developments as soon as they become available without the need for people to add fancier graphics making mistakes in the process (no two TV stations will display the same storm track).  Furthermore, the NHC also issues *written forecasts* with *detailed discussions about each storm*!!!  If you read those and later watch TV, you will see that the news forecasters are not doing anything connected to meteorology --- instead, they just read aloud what the NHC is saying, adding the particular flamboyance flavor of choice.  Of course, they make mistakes along the way as well.

Nonsense.