Does it matter? At this stage it's just ridiculous that there's no more uproar towards Boeing or even direct intervention into it. Maybe because it's one of the 2 disfuntional members of the duopoly at the foundation of global air transit with massive geopolitical consequences if major changes are suggested.

It depends on whether you want to respond to stories like this with advocacy or understanding.

Definitely both. You never really want to stop understanding, but understanding in public interest cases serves to inform advocacy, and any story can cross the evidence threshold where advocacy becomes the primary concern. I think we're there with Boeing.

Did Bombardier have a scandal where cost cutting measures led to the crash of two aeroplanes and the loss of hundreds of lives?

Does it sell more ads? Does it get more eyeballs? Do people click on the story? Does the writer get promoted? A bonus? Is this a conspiracy against Boeing? Is the owner of the newspaper short Boeing and long Airbus? (those last four questions are /s the first two maybe less so.)

I used to laugh at those pushing "mainstream media" wild stories (e.g. from a certain portion of Americans) but Journalism isn't what it used to be, and maybe it was never what it used to be.

I do think that focus on Boeing is somewhat warranted but it's a good question how do we get a real unbiased picture. Especially given that accidents are a low probability event and it's hard to determine what happens by chance, within reason, or is really reflecting something concerning that has to be addressed and how it should be addressed. Your average Journalist is lacking the training and tools to think about these things and they wouldn't even know who is the right expert and what is the right data to look at.