A very interesting test of factual reporting has come FOX VS CNN

This morning on Salon (as big a hater of Fox as they come)  - over Ferguson and Officer Wilson's 'broken' eye socket (or NOT)

Anatomy of a Fox News smear: Ann Coulter, Matt Drudge and the “dumbest person on the Internet”

This takes down the accuracy of Gateway Pundit if Salon is correct, BTW, because the 'dumbest person on the internet' is Jim Hoft who publishes there, and this story was yanked from there, and Drudge.
Salon claims via CNN that there is NO WAY Officer Wilson has a broken eye socket as widely reported, and Fox is clueless because they took a story from Gateway Pundit like fools, actually like Dan Rather
WaPo, non rabid, but left of center, says:

Magee said that prosecutors have not received any medical records relating to Wilson so far. ​But he said that since Wilson was taken to the hospital, they assume there are medical records and they just haven’t received them yet.
A family friend of Wilson’s told The Washington Post that Wilsonsuffered a fractured eye socket. Ferguson police have said that Wilson’s face was injured and he needed medical treatment, but they did not go into any detail. On Wednesday night, Ferguson Mayor James Knowles III told Fox News that he could not confirm reports that Wilson suffered a fractured eye bone.
Ferguson Mayor James Knowles III told Fox News he could not confirm reports about the fractured eye bone.

CNN, has their 'source' which says he has seen the x-ray and Wilson had a swollen face PERIOD.

More... it just doesn't stop there.

Hoft also cited a tweet from Christine Byers, a reporter for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, who said, “Police sources tell me more than a dozen witnesses have corroborated cop’s version of events in shooting.” This was odd, as at this point there had been no story from Wilson, who had gone into hiding shortly after the shooting.
Apparently the Post-Dispatch found it odd, too, as the paper published a story making clear that they never published Byers’ information, that she was not working on this story, and that she had been on leave since March. Byers then tweeted: “On FMLA from paper. Earlier tweets did not meet standards for publication.”

The link to the St. Louis paper is ACCURATELY reported by Salon.

And what of Jim Hoft? How did Hoft react when his story fell apart? Being Jim Hoft means never having to say “I was wrong.” In fact, in a follow-up piece, Hoft doubled down. His original two anonymous sources were now four anonymous sources. Hoft even took CNN to task for not running with his original BS story. Under the headline “NOW THERE ARE FOUR SOURCES: Officer Darren Wilson Suffered Fractured Eye Socket,” Hoft hilariously cites himself as a source, then closes with: ”CNN really needs to be more responsible with such sensitive information.”
Not only was Hoft doubling down on his now discredited original story, he was taking a victory lap. He claims to have single handedly caused the “Liberal Media” to pull out of Ferguson under the banner headline “Liberal Media Pulls Out of #Ferguson – After Reports of Officer Wilson’s Busted Up Face” And for extra comedic effect, Hoft cites World Net Daily, one of the craziest, least reliable sources in the entire wingnutosphere and known to critics as World Nut Daily.
Hoft is still “reporting” on Ferguson, posting a string of articles that take race baiting to the next level. He talks about “black lynch mobs” and decries the looting and rioting while poor, innocent Darren Wilson is “struggling” and “in fear for his life.” He claims Wilson’s supporters are receiving death threats (from black people) and reports on how white people are co-opting the now famous “hands up” posture to promise not to rob convenience stores. He explains that Mike Brown’s family calling for an end to protests is actually a calling for protests to continue.

Frankly I have to wonder WHY Salon published this story BEFORE X-rays and medical records from the hospital became part of the indisputable public record.
This story is not about Wilson, or Ferguson, but about how news is reported. Did Fox get 'Dan Rathered' by running to believe what their news editors' inner political beliefs yelled at them, or are CNN and Salon doing that same thing.
It will be VERY INTERESTING to know the truth.