Chrenkoff says:

"If the media is painting an overly negative picture of Iraq, my mission is to point out to people all the positive developments taking place. My readers can then look at both, give each set of information the weight they consider appropriate, and then make up their mind as to what's going on in Iraq."

But he is not trying to just present the other side of the story and let the readers weigh each. He explicitly tells his readers that his picture is the more acurate (from Taking the Field: A roundup of the past two weeks' good news from Iraq. BY ARTHUR CHRENKOFF Monday, August 16, 2004):

"As Boston Globe columnist Jeff Jacoby writes, "The press tends to emphasize what's going wrong in Iraq because of an inbuilt bias for the negative--only the plane that crashes, not the 999 that land safely, [makes] news. The result is that while the bad news in Iraq gets reported everywhere, the reports of good news you have to look for." For the sake of fairness, one might add that in Iraq it's perhaps 10 or 20 planes that crash, yet even with that caveat the mainstream media coverage often give one the impression that the whole Iraqi air fleet has gone down in flames.

Of course, his analogy is absurd in the extreme. If the crash rate of airliners was 1 in 1000, no one would fly because it would be way too risky. If it were 20 in 1000, there would be multiple crashes daily at every major airport. But more to the point, he seems to have the figures backwards. Only about 1% to 2% of things in Iraq go right, not the reverse. So he isn't just giving facts and letting the reader decide, he is intentionally misleading. He doesn't let each reader, "...give each set of information the weight they consider appropriate...", he tells them how each should be weighted and he does so in a dishonest way.