Obviously all commanders would 'spin' their reports to some extent. It's the extent that makes the difference.

You are wrong in saying that the Bulletins were not intended as history: that was exactly their purpose, to provide the official version for the French people.

See also this letter, which makes the 'fake news' component clear:

To the Comte de Montalivet,‭ ‬Minister of the Interior.‭ ‬Fontainebleau,‭ ‬13.10.10
The Prefects are to be sent a weekly circular‭ ‬to counter false reports,‭ ‬direct their opinions and language and influence the public opinion of their department.‭

" The third point of the circular should refer to the affairs of Spain.‭ ‬The French armies there are in the best possible condition,‭ ‬and abundantly supplied..‭ (‬gives details‭] ‬ "..You will say that the reports circulated against the Duke of‭ ‬Abrantes are calumnious and false,‭ ‬that the General in question is winning the greatest distinction,‭ ‬and that the most perfect harmony reigns amongst the various‭ ‬generals.....‭ ‬General Suchet...‭ ‬is besieging Tortosa...‭ ‬that the Duke of Tarento having moved towards Tarragona,‭ ‬a few armed bands have taken advantage of his absence to gather about his rear,‭ ‬and violate certain parts of the Pyrenean frontier..‭ ‬..‭ ‬that a few smugglers and the remnants of the Spanish army,‭ ‬have formed themselves into bands,‭ ‬which seize travellers‭ ‬-‭ ‬hardly to be wondered at in such a large country as Spain,‭ ‬-‭ ‬but that,‭ ‬on the whole,‭ ‬things are going very well indeed.‭"

When considering the level of popular support for Napoleon one must always remember that throughout his reign they were fed propaganda and had very little chance of learning the truth. Even the final bulletin from Russia, though it did admit to the catastrophe, still lied about the causes.

Susan