Before you can tell the truth you have to know it, and journalists are worse than most at misleading themselves through confirmation bias, and “are more interested in validation of their arguments than hearing another side or in hearing the truth.”
For instance it is very hard to find the truth about Benghazi, but your pre-conceived opinions about Clinton will slant the interpretation of the known facts:
Eric Nordstrom said he sent two cables to State Department headquarters in March 2012 and July 2012 requesting additional diplomatic security agents for Benghazi, but he received no responses. In statements immediately after the attack, neither President Barack Obama nor Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton mentioned terrorism. And both gave credence to the notion that the attack was related to protests about an anti-Islam video, but witnesses in Benghazi later told CBS News that no protest had occurred at all, and “I take responsibility” for what happened on September 11, Clinton told CNN Monday after the attack.
To Clinton supporters, she was ignorant of the request for extra security and did not personally deny it; it was handled by her staff, and the Republicans are using a tragedy for political point-scoring.
To people familiar with prior Clinton scandals, she denied requests for extra security then tried to cover it up with a contrived explanation of a spontaneous riot caused by an anti-Muslim video, that she could not have foreseen.
The truth is usually the simplest story that explains the known facts, in this case probably that her department made the wrong call on the security at the US Consulate, and that her instinct was to fabricate a story that showed her in a better light for the 6 o’clock News. There was no protest, so this was pure invention on her part and it didn’t stand up to scrutiny. Career Politicians telling lies is hardly front-page news, but there is no evidence that she deliberately withheld resources that could have saved four Americans’ lives.