Agreed. In the U.S., legacy media often has substantial criticism about the other party (two-party system, so news will be biased toward one party or another), but then throws in a ridiculous non-solution from their side. Example: Fox News is complaining about how instead of improving under-funded public schools in poor areas, Democrats want to implement a "woke" curriculum. This is true and must be addressed. Then, Fox News says the solution is government-funded charter schools. So really, nobody wants to improve the public school situation, but there was a kernel of truth to the criticism of the other party.

This is usually how it goes, but there is also another tactic, perfected by Roger Stone in the Nixon era. Blatant, ridiculous lies about one's opponent ("FBI proves Hillary Clinton is a baby-eating Satanist"), and mockery and hatred towards them ("What has two fat thighs and small breasts?", "Kill Hillary") I'm not mentioning this because I'm a fan of Hillary (I wasn't even old enough to vote in that election), but this is the preferred type of propaganda being dissipated informally (through social media shills and the like), while the more respectable type is used by the news. The news also uses lies and personal attacks, but it's less blatant.

TRAs use both tactics.