Objectivity must not be EZ.

Here's why we become cynical about the "news" that the media reports:

Taken from the Maine News (http://newsmaine.net/20019-june-2014-breaks-all-heat-records), the headline says, "June 2014 Breaks All Heat Records." The article starts by presenting the following: "The month of June was the hottest month ever, according to reports released by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) on Monday...The month of June has broken all the heat records everywhere." Note, please, the use of words like "all" and "everywhere" in this article that leans on what should be a credible source: NOAA.

But, you see, I knew better. While the local weather is only anecdotal and not indicative of "climate," June was actually cooler than normal here in San Antonio. I looked up the official records, and during June we had 12 days where the high was below the average, 8 days where the high was exactly at the average, and only 10 days above the average. The cooler days were up to 5 degrees F. below average, the hottest of the days was 4 degrees F. above the average, with most of the "hotter" days being only 1 degree F. above average. June was very pleasant in San Antonio.

Later in the article, we learn that they knew that they had lied with their headline and leading paragraphs with the following admission: "...no record has been broken in the US. It was noted that the last month in the US was the 33rd hottest June in the records."

Thirty-third hottest. Far from breaking all heat records.  So, call me a cynic. I believe NO headlines, and am impressed that the authors of the above article were honest enough to admit to lying to their casual, low-information readers (who probably never made it to the end of the article). This is objectivity in reporting?