I agree heartily with some of the analysis redstar writes up (indeed, I'm trying to formulate the way of telling an anecdote illustrating a recent experience of mine without giving away too many identities), but some of it didn't ring quite true and you've put your finger on it.

This is not just an English language press issue. Coverage in the French and German press of Indian and Chinese issues that I've had some familiarity with over the last 20 years or so has often been very disappointing. Indeed, when I lived in the US, the French language reporting of US events that I was present at taking pictures wasn't very grounded or accurate either.

Migeru quite liked my formulation, so I'll repeat it again, one of the biggest issues is "Our Foreign Correspondent syndrome."

1. Within the "homeland" there are the usual ownership/structural problems inside the media, different countries are at different points in the evolution of the problem. Fore example, France has taken a massive leap forward towards the black hole in domestic reporting with the ownership consolidation and the coagulation of owners around Sarkozy. Murdoch pulled the UK press scene along that route many years ago now.

2. On "foreign matters" the average reporter from any language which is not close to native will apply the following filters:

a) What does my good friend from the local paper of record say? (so, the reporter from El Pais parrots the NYT on US issues and the reporter from The London Times will go ask her friend at Le Monde on Paris issues.)
Note: this happens more and more as budgets are constrained. Original reporting requires work, but also resources and if the management back home are harassing you about expenses you won't spend 4 days travelling around to do your own reporting, unless it's a scoop. Not just easier, but far cheaper to switch on the TV and call some of your friends.

b) How does this fit into the general prejudices of my readers? (e.g. French reporters in the US will analyse every gun crime by reference to American barbarity, wild-west individualism, insert cliche here.)

c) How does this fit into the prejudices of my boss? (e.g. any London Times reporter has to take the words from their friend at Le Monde and add several layers of neo-liberal spin and some anti-Europe, anti-EU message. That's what working for Murdoch means.)

It's worth noting that both (b) and (c) can be done internally by the reporter, but also by the editors back at the copy desk in the home country.

Not every foreign correspondent behaves this way, but by far the majority do.