Off the top of my head, a news item about water conservation. One guy, perh some official, stated, paraphrasing here, that it was ridiculous given the drought, that we had not started curtailing the offering of free water at restaurants earlier, making the audience believe that this step was a cornerstone of conserving water. It's not credible, but the host agreed and didn't question the reasoning.

Ok sure, I grant you it's an "awareness" device, but a mechanism for conserving water it's not.

Also, they trot out the trope about almonds using vast amounts of water... Yes, they do, but do does everything else. Did they get into the vast amounts of water or takes to produce a liter of wine? No, of course not.

These both seem like incredibly niche objections. They're not somehow in bed with the anti-almond, anti-ice water lobby. I'm not saying they don't run a lousy report now and then -- that obviously happens.

Oh this kind of occurrence happens every morning. I still listen to them because they are marginally better than other news and much better than jocular morning shows.