A really good example of this would be local coverage of the Obamacare rollout. Chances are if your local paper is associated with one of the big paper companies, like McClatchy, they did a story that will sound like the one from my paper.
My local paper just happened to send a reporter to a local "community group" that you aren't told is being paid to sign people up for ACA. Then the article covers two people who work, but don't get coverage. After being helped they have coverage and it is either cheap or free, and everybody lives happily ever after, the end.
When FReepers posted articles from their papers I noticed that they all sounded exactly the same. These articles have faded since the rollout has been so bad, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a replay of this as soon as the website stops making news. The Administration knows they needed to deflect attention from the loss of individual policies with a counter narrative.
It seems that Obama counted on the news media to do the work of selling the plan. My local media were nothing but cheerleaders the first couple of weeks, before all the problems started to get noticed. Even now, the problems are soft-pedaled and always offset with “good news.” Six weeks into the law, I still have not received one word from the government about what to do, or from any of my liberal congress people. “Oh, well, check the website.” WHICH website? There’s the federal one and the state ones and all the medical insurance companies are running ads for THEIR websites. And what about the millions of people - mostly seniors - who still aren’t on-line?