Helpful hint for reading an article written by old media: if there are words in the story, you can be sure it's unmitigated bulls***

See if you can detect the sublime -- almost invisible -- bias from USA Today (PDF):

5 men targeted bridge near Cleveland, upset that Occupy wouldn't back violence

The FBI sting operation that led to the arrests of five men in an alleged conspiracy to blow up a Cleveland-area bridge involved now-familiar undercover techniques to identify a potentially dangerous terrorist plot...

...What sets the alleged Ohio operation apart is its link to self-proclaimed anarchists — with no connections to international terrorist organizations — who believed that members of the ubiquitous Occupy protest movement had not gone far enough to express their displeasure with high-flying corporate America...

...Almost immediately after the charges were announced, the Occupy campaign moved to distance itself from the allegations... Acknowledging that the suspects ... were "associated with Occupy Cleveland," the group said in a statement that the five were "in no way representing or acting on behalf of Occupy Cleveland.''

I've highlighted the attempts of old media -- including in a headline -- to distance the Occupiers from the Occupy movement. A movement, I might add, endorsed by Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi.

Pity that few media outlets also noted that the same group had plotted to bomb this summer’s Republican National Convention.

Of course, the real headline should have read: "Obama-Endorsed #OWS occupiers arrested for plotting to blow up bridge, GOP convention". But that would have required accuracy, honesty and integrity, three attributes sorely lacking in state-run media.