My local Bristol paper sometimes has a very odd idea of what constitutes "local news". It described an event happening "near Bristol" but on further reading this was actually near Malvern, over 60 miles away, not even in the West but in the Midlands and where they speak with a Midlands accent (being quite near Birmingham).
Whilst I agree there is a problem with journalists getting things right, and often if not usually over-generalising eg near Bristol can cover a multitude of sins, or my pet hate of pointless rounding off eg "
BR▸ got rid of steam over 50 years ago" - what IQ level are they aiming at if they think their punters won't understand the number 52? - there is also the matter of personal pereception.
I remember an item on TV many years ago when punters were asked where they thought "The Midlands" started. The Cornish thought they started at Exeter; Devonians thought they started at Bristol; most Bristolians I know would say the Midlands started at Brum.
And what's a "Midlands accent?" A trained ear (or people who are interested in such things) will notice the gradual change in accents even over a few miles. Bristol people do not have the same accent as Gloucester people who do not have the same accent as Worcester people and so on. And I am afraid if you think that Malvern is full of people sounding like Frank Skinner or Amy Turtle I am afraid you are severely misinformed...
Then there is the term "middle aged." On the basis of the biblical three score and ten, you're middle aged at 35. But nobody at 35 calls themselves middle-aged, whilst old gits like me with one foot in the grave and have been collecting a pension for years, usually do.
Funny old world, innit?