As long as "reporters" are hired to cover stories that they know nothing about, there will be stories as completely off the mark as this:

U.S. military angers Iran by calling Persian Gulf 'Arabian Gulf'. 

Let's see how many mistakes this moron can make in one article about one thing. 

First, the whole premise.  The terms "Persian Gulf" and "Arabian Gulf" are interchangeable.  The writer wants the reader to believe that it's always been called the Persian Gulf by stating "the name change provoked outrage from the easily provoked government of Iran--which was known as Persia from around the sixth century BC until 1935".  That part is true, and the Persians/Iranians have probably called the gulf the Persian Gulf that whole time.  But during the same millenia, the Arabs have called it the Arabian Gulf.  And westerners have been calling it the Arabian Gulf for hundreds of years as well.  So the premise that there is, and always has been, one correct name for the gulf is false.  And he could have found out how false that premise is simply by googling "Arabian Gulf Maps" and seen some of the ancient maps that show the name as al-Khaleej al Arabi in arabic, or Arabian Gulf in English, Italian, and other western languages.  

Second, the writer uses the term "Navy Flacks" to describe a Navy spokesman who states why they use the term.  Explaining something correctly isn't what a flack does.  What a flack does is write an entire article based on a false premise to carry out a narrative already established to falsify or detract.

Third, the writer states; "This isn't the first time that the U.S. government has agitated parts of the Arab world with a word choice."  Iran isn't part of the "Arab world" and they would be angry about that statement.  More angry than the use of the term Arabian Gulf.  So stating that Iranians are part of the Arab world only shows the writers ignorance of the both the middle east in general, and Iran in particular.  

So in a seven paragraph article, the writer gets the main premise wrong, then uses a derogatory term for others that describes him perfectly, then makes the very same mistake, only worse, that he's accused the US Navy of.  This is the type of article that now  dominates the old news media.  Full of innacuracies and innuendo, but right on the mark for meeting the journalistic narrative that the Left wants to see in all articles.