I agree with Dan. There have been far too many cases of different MSM outlets using the same wording/phrasing on breaking stories for it to have been mere chance. Sometimes the exact same wording.
No question about it - they frequently use the same wording, phrasing and story line/narrative, while omitting any facts or details that tend to contradict the "approved" narrative.
The point I'm trying to make is that we cannot assume from such commonalities alone that a "conspiracy" is afoot, or that purposeful collaboration between media outlets is undeniable. For one thing, many of these media sources are in direct competition with one another for circulation or ratings or web advertising "hits". It is simply not in their interest to collaborate on everything.
Instead, from what I've seen and heard, liberal opinion makers all arrive at pretty much same place because they're on the same metaphorical "Info train" - they get their news from the
New York Times and the
Washington Post... who increasingly get
their news from UPI, AP and Reuters (all liberal-dominated, of course). They get their position papers from the
Center for American Progress and
Brookings. They get press releases directly from the DNC, complete with talking points. They've got incestuous, revolving door relationships with government institutions in Washington/Maryland/Virginia. Hell, they
marry each other in great numbers, after having gone to the same prep schools and colleges and grad schools. They live in an echo chamber of "acceptable" liberal opinion, which light never enters and dissent never escapes. And yes - they're also lazy.