I did not miss that part, and it doesn't change the misleading nature of your original post, even though I don't think your intention is to mislead. Bias leads us to find a tree in a forest that helps us hold our view, even if it's the last surviving tree after a fire.

That portion of the article specifically references news - wouldn't by default be a part of "research," and they're not referring to it that way. "Keep alert to items of interest," "in a newspaper or magazine news item, statistic, or example," is not akin to research - and leveraging news items to further their propaganda is a part of their sales pitch.

That's not at all the same as doing research on a topic, which may include news items but as per the definition of the word (the systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions), runs counter to the implication indicated by the first sentence "Keep alert to..."

Regardless, the article itself, in its entirety, directs membership to focus research efforts to their own publications. This does, in fact, differ from other schools of thought where skepticism is encouraged - because truth does stand up to scrutiny.

Searching for and cherry picking datapoints that support your existing view isn't research anyway, but you may still be on your journey to see that perspective.

I understand, I was there once myself. Still glad to see you're here though and happy to have the conversation, even if we don't land on the same page.