The Biden laptop story is the best-known recent example. Many relatively "factual" outlets refused to cover it, whereas if it were beneficial to the liberal cause, you know they'd have done the 12-36 goes hours of work required to verify it
The laptop story was very sketchy and treated with suitable skepticism. And now that we have a clearer picture, it's not interesting at all. While the laptop itself may have turned out to be real, I'm not aware that the contents have ever been authenticated and the fact that the story was only trumpeted by Rudy Giuliani makes it campaign propaganda. We didn't learn anything about it, but we did see Hunter's penis entered into the Congressional record.
It was very interesting. It revealed a lot of influence-pedalling and strongly implied Joe Biden profits from it, or at least facilitates his son profiting from it.
Not a shred of its contents were ever disproven, but much was corroborated.
It's only "uninteresting" if you exclusively follow NPR, I think.
