A common point of critique within imperialist western journalism is that there is no diversity of views within the DPRK’s own media – this is a falsehood.
A recent example of opposed opinions happened in April 3rd when Rodong Sinmun featured an op-ed by An Chol-gwon  that criticised capitalist (bourgeois) culture on the same day that a RoK troupe had a concert in Pyongyang, which Chairman Kim Jong-un himself attended and it was reported by Rodong Sinmun that, “[Kim Jong-un] was deeply moved to see [DPRK] people sincerely acclaiming the performance, deepening the understanding of [RoK] popular art.“
Despite having an opinion that is contrary to Chairman Kim Jong-un’s statements, An Chol-gwon continues to write for Rodong Sinmun. If you were to contrast that display of two diverging opinions in DPRK media with any selections from imperialist journalism, you would find while there is an illusion of various media sources, their journalism is exactly the same.
In fact, there is plenty of reason to suspect that Seoul branches of western journalism lead a concerted effort in propagating the same anti-DPRK news. 
As mentioned on the tweets, the Seoul bureau chiefs of NPR, Stars & Stripes, Wall
Street Journal, Agence France Presse, and Associated Press had to cancel their dinner
so they could report on breaking news of the upcoming DPRK/RoK
While they went their separate ways, their news reports ended up being exactly the same not only in the message but in the lexical choices as well.
Stars & Stripes: ”Trump was cautiously optimistic“ [x]
AP: ”Trump cautiously welcomed ‘possible progress’“
WSJ: ”White House’s wariness…Trump said he is hopeful“ [x]
NPR and AFP did not explicitly use “cautious” or “wary,” but they quoted the same Trump tweet as the others did.
As it show here, there is no difference between the reports by the Seoul-based bureau chiefs from imperialist nations, however imperialist rags like the Wall Street Journal and AP bureau chiefs spend a great deal of time criticising the DPRK for providing only “one narrative” of “media manipulation”.  
Last year, NPR and WSJ Seoul bureau chiefs along with many anti-DPRK think-tank employees and an U.N. expert attended the wedding of a Reuters reporter at the home of UK’s ambassador to RoK. Are we truly expected to believe that there is no collusion and a common motif between imperialist journalists to co-operate on “media manipulation”?  
Whether the news agency is located in New York City, London, or Seoul, there is a common agenda within western imperialist journalism and these agencies do not compete against each other: they openly, indiscreetly co-operate with each other in ensuring mass propagation of anti-DPRK propaganda.