I wasn't aware the news went anywhere. I got a notification that the incident happened on my iPhone and read about it in the New York Times app on my iPad, and I found the quality of the content to be pretty good. It sounds as though the problem isn't that the news has gone anywhere but rather that the author isn't using an optimal method to find the news.

Of course news is always going to have a bias. The key is that it's less about what you read as much as it is how you read it.

Reminds me of a discussion I had on a basketball forum with a fan complaining about their lack of awareness regarding the start of the season. Went roughly like this:

  Them: I didn't even know the season had started. They've dropped the ball on marketing.
  Me:   There have been ads on TV.
  Them: Oh, I don't watch TV.
  Me:   Quite a few articles in the main newspapers in your city and mine.
        There was a launch event too.
  Them: I don't read newspapers any more.
  Me:   Big promos on the league website.
  Them: Oh, I don't visit that. Too busy.
  Me:   Lots of league and fan talk on Twitter and Facebook.
  Them: Nah, I don't use them.
  Me:   Your team's newsletter has mentioned it a lot.
  Them: I haven't subscribed to that.
  Me:   You read this forum. We've been talking about it for weeks.
  Them: I don't really read many threads.

At some point, if you're interested in a given topic, you have to make some effort to poke around or subscribe to something!