And that's it. You report the facts of the investigation and then the public has an unbiased view of the facts, without the subtle nuances that introduce bias. Such as, "A black police officer shot a Vietnamese man. Until the facts of the case reveal that race was a motive, then those details presumptively introduce race as a motive. That's the kind of journalism that is successful financially because it generates strong emotions, and thus viewers however it's subtly dishonest not because those facts aren't true, but because of the motivation behind why those facts where included.

Let's help him create a 2nd top ten website instead of being another HN troll criticizing bravely on the Internet.

If wikinews isn't able to get this idea working, why is everyone else required to keep supporting it. Maybe it's time for an alternative.