If the media reports only what other people say and does not verify or investigate......?
most are owned by multi millionaires with an agenda there will always be at least two versions where ever you look it is like democracy a fallacy
Some reporters work undercover in Corporations and take copies of emails etc as proof or use skilled Hackers to get hold of incriminating information. Or use other illegal practices, such as phone tapping.
The key is who are the other people that are the source. Sometimes reporting is on the location. Sometimes there is an investigative report. Reputable newspapers want at least two independent sources to report important information even if they don't disclose the sources. If sources have to be named, there would be far less known. The Watergate investigation had an inside undisclosed source that eventually lead to resignation of Nixon. It is better when fact checking and verification is complete, but sometimes it isn't available, and it is more than gossip if history of reporting is reliable. Add, per comment, - The real problem is people accepting everything they hear as true. Not everything can be fully verified. It was reported that after joint chief Pentagon meeting where Trump stated he wanted to increase nuclear weapon 10x that then Sec'y of State Tillerson called Trump a F'cking Moron after leaving the meeting. It had two sources. Even after it was denied, Trump has been insulted about his demands, understanding of situations, and focus of memory by multiple people independently on different occassions. There is enough for me, and I would rather hear about it than not and when multiple independent reports are made it is fairly reliable. It isn't the same as rumor spreading depending upon the words used and understanding what is said and who says it.