Although I don't think you're sincere, I think you're not entirely wrong. The "reporter" title has been played with fast and loose, and just the other day there was an news report how, in some college campuses, activist groups are leading what they referred to as "our small contribution to this culture war", by actively encouraging young, naive, untrained but sincere kids to call themselves reporters to "expose the truth". The premise was that anyone with a social media platform should be considered a reporter, and encourage kids who have barely grown into their own skin to "authoritatively report" what they experience.

Then there's the scandal from a few years ago, possibly still going on today, with the news content sub-contracts, where news article and opinion pieces were churned out by people in Asia who couldn't possibly have witnessed any of the western news they were reporting about.

We even have cases of the most popular news channel in America routinely, demonstrably, and in an unapologetically biased way, lying in the name of entertainment, or bringing in guests with unverified credentials to their news shows.

So I guess, tl;dr. I think you're not wrong for wanting to critically think about news, reporters, and their sources. However, be careful that you do your homework when considering if something is fake or accurate. It's too easy to say "you're naive if...." or "this feels fake" but then have no plans to seek and evaluate diverse point of views to gather information that can be proved or disproved over time.