Re: "we don't need analysis, spin or opinion on the news."
Very wrong. If you just report "facts", you're just a scribe.
Indeed.
In the past, the hallmark of a high quality news source used to be that it always tried to differentiate between news and analysis. Sure, news sources in this class were still biased, by choosing what to report and what not. They, however, made it clear what is news and what is analysis, point of view and interpretation. An example of such news source from 40-odd years ago was International Herald Tribune. As a result, you could buy it on the other side of the wall from a newsagent (though only in large cities due to limited amount of print being shipped).
The age of Facebook and Faux News is deforming this. Even news sources which used to be reputable now unashamedly mix position and analysis with the news to a point where the distinction simply disappears. One of the reasons for this is that the readers are now being conditioned to this. News sources which do not fit, do not survive.
This is the greatest danger of the age of Facebook and Faux News. All news are becoming fake by the nature of position and interpretation being embedded throughout in a form where it is indistinguishable from the news. That in turn leads to 99% of the population having their opinions gradually polarized further and further because they never see a piece of information which deviates from their chosen position. Social news platforms actively assist in this as they get enough ad views only by showing articles that "fit the view". So this is exactly what they do. Regardless of the truthfulness of the contents of course.
It is embedded within. The endgame on this is clear - we will be on each other's throats. Not a question of if, but a question of when and which fractions grab the pitchforks first.
Frankly, I do not see how we can stop it too.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
