Just as an example, a friend of mine had a fishing video get picked up by a few different news outlets. He gave a small writeup explaining the video to each of them. Not one of them reported the correct information. None of them got the location correct, only one got the kind of fish correct and one of them might as well have been talking about a totally different video, they literally contradicted what you could see in the video.

The way I see it, of something as trivial as a fishing video can be reported on so completely and utterly incorrectly, without the slightest regard for even the tiny amount of facts provided alongside the video, then why should i assume anything else is reported correctly?

Possibly. I don't think either one of us has immediate access to a solid survey or report/analysis - so it's an interesting point of its own that we have a wildly different initial estimate/assumption ¯\_(ツ)_/¯