I used to love 60 Minutes and believed them.
Then they did a story on a situation I was personally completely familiar with. They made the story just about the opposite of what actually happened.
Interestingly, they did it without lying at all. They simply inferred and shaded things so they appeared differently.
I had the same experience as you. They did a story back in the 80’s implying that pilots were not being allowed enough rest and sleep between flights by their stingy employers and this was causing accidents. They showed a picture of a helicopter crash in North Carolina. My dad was a former army helicopter pilot in Vietnam and currently working for a helicopter company that leased helicopter ambulances to hospitals. He said that helicopter crashed because the pilot was showing off to some nurses how close he could fly to telephone wires and he accidentally hit one. It had nothing to do with lack of sleep.
I have had trouble believing anything on 60 minutes ever since.
I too enjoyed 60 Min until they claimed the Audi 5000s had uncontrollable acceleration!
Gearheads everywhere dream of uncontrollable acceleration!
When it is too good to be true, its fake.
They lost me when they did a hit piece on the Waco, Texas DA back in the 80s.
Something I've occasionally used as a lever to help open up people's eyes about what is going on, is the fact that the media almost always gets it wrong.
Just about everyone has at least one topic or subject that they really know a lot about. It can be just about anything, but if you dig a while, even with what you might consider to be the dumbest person, there is one thing, that they are interested in enough to have taken the time to learn a fair amount about it. What you do is get the person to think back about any time they've actually seen that subject reported on to just about any degree. Then ask them, "did they get it right?" Almost invariably, they'll immediately go into a long discussion about how badly the media got it wrong. Sometimes it is unfamiliarity on the reporter's part. Sometimes, it's intentional twisting of facts and circumstances to give people the wrong impression.
Then you ask them, to consider the fact that since they got this particular subject that they are intimately familiar with so horribly wrong, what exactly is it, that makes them think they don't get most everything else wrong about things they aren't so familiar with.
This is especially useful if they've ever seen a story reported on that they were personally involved with.
I've seen several people really set back by this line of discussion.