Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is wrong. You are saying, this is so established that entertaining any alternative is wrongheaded. No. That's not how it works. We need dissent even in the middle of battle. We need to re-asses and continuously examine what we hold true to ensure it is still true. People are not gods. We can be in the wrong. This echoes GWBushe's you're either with us, or you're against us. It's a made up dichotomy.
Speaking of made-up dichotomies, surely there's some option in between "news shows should constantly debate X vs Y" and "X is so established that entertaining any alternative is wrongheaded".
For example, the southern border. You have OpenBorders vs Close the border camps. But there has always been the guest worker visa program on the hoper but no one wants it. It would drive business costs up, it would drain the Ds and Rs of energy around that topic. If you look at many LatAM countries, they themselves implement controls so that locals have preferences for jobs even with respect to immigrants legally able to work. But CNN never mentions those aspects. CNN doesn't mention Bernie used to vote against having foreigners compete against the local workforce for jobs.
Or abortion vs Abortion bans. Let's look at the rest of the world, and if not the whole world, then Europe, and we see there a mixture with some consensus around some figures. But we don't get that coverage, it's all outrage one way or the other.