To vamp a little on vonnik's thread. Try this thought experiment. What would the Times say about you and your job if they wanted to dig up a scandal? Your taxes? Could a reporter truly understand the technical aspects of your job with a 15 minute interview where they are as interested in getting viewers as they are in understanding what you do? Then why do you think the Times can cover equally complex entities properly, like the military or largish businesses? How can they understand what a cop does on a day to day basis without long-term embedded coverage?
When's the last time you heard political reportage not about the actual issues, but about what that media organization's polls say what people think about the actual issues?
Or: visit a country or state or city you know nothing about. Hang around with the locals and listen to what's important to them. Now imagine how the Times would cover it. I know the media seem to have absolutely zero knowledge about the daily life of Chinese citizens, even when reporting from China. I only know because I have family there, and they're cogent, smart people. But it took me 15 years before I felt I could discuss China fairly.
How would the Times cover the local mining community? How many kids are in 4H in the USA? A lot more than the Times thinks, I bet. How much coverage do they get? How many Girl Scouts are there in the country? How many people donate massive amounts of time to their favorite causes and get a ton out of it? Why don't we hear when local church groups scrape together 5 semis worth of food for people in Haiti? Why don't we hear how effectively Joplin rebuilt itself after the hurricane with very, very little Federal help?
Turn the tables. What if you had to report on the job of a reporter for an hour. Could you report about that competently by midnight deadline? What if you were given a story about the last fight your best friend had with his or her spouse/life partner. Could you cover it fairly in 250 words with a linkbait title?
What makes you think people do not understand?
Can you relate to us an experience that made you think that?
"One of the things..."
What are the other things that people do not understand?
They probably should. They censor all the hard foreign political stuff to not effect public sentiment. They give you just enough to keep you on their program.
Goes way beyond that...
First, our brains are much worse at reality and thinking than thought.
Science on reasoning:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYmi0DLzBdQ
Manufacturing consent:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwU56Rv0OXM https://vimeo.com/39566117
The corporate attack on education:
This is compounded by the fact that the world is full of people acting crazy and doing awful things to each other. News organizations are actually pretty careful to not bombard us with constant photos of dead children, even though Syria alone could fill the pages of the NYT everyday with images of their mangled bodies. (I have sat on the photo desk, and seen the photos stream by on the AP feed -- they rarely make the paper. )
So news organizations are aware of the fatigue that certain sensations cause, and they seek to mitigate them. They need their readers to feel just enough emotion, but not too much. A perpetual state of excitement and irritation. This is one reason why climate change doesn't get the coverage it deserves. It's just too depressing, and people stop reading.