As an exercise, take a look at this article about the recent passage of a right-to-work bill, which makes it illegal to force workers to pay union dues as a condition of employment.
Notice that the article in question spends the vast majority of its time discussing the views of the opponents of the bill: there are no less than four pro-union protesters quoted in the article, all being given ample “quote time” to explain why they hold a pro-union position.
Nowhere in the article is the right-to-work position explained in the words of supporters of the legislation. Nowhere. Their voices are silenced. The author of this piece has carefully chosen quotes that refer only to the political process involved and bumper-sticker slogans, with no corresponding depth of coverage for the right-to-work proponents. USA Today gives them no platform to share their reasons in their own words, and instead chooses to promote only the pro-union position.
Neither do they refer to the union violence caught on camera during the protests. Notice how the police wore “riot gear” but videos of people getting physically assaulted by angry union thugs (with no police crowd control in sight) don’t get any mention?