The VERY Naive Perspective 

This was stated:

'There was no implication that ALL VNR's are propaganda.  If  SOME VNRs are demonstrably propaganda, which I infer is undisputed, then the statement is factually correct and ideologically neutral.'

Separated into two concepts: 
a) that "There was no implication that ALL VNRs are propaganda." 
-and-
b) "If  SOME VNRs are demonstrably propaganda ... then the statement is factually correct and ideologically neutral." 

In regards to the first:-
A Video "News" Release by the government, which is ( as they, a priori, are ) intended to create the appearance of congruity for an idea which aids the government through causing an apparent or actual concordance between the beliefs of those in control and those being controlled is, by definition, propaganda.
In regards to the second:-
Is the statement that the labeling of VNR's is an ideologically neutral act?  It would not be, as, through labeling it, one is categorizing it ideologically. 

Please do not misunderstand, IMHO VNR's are an advanced form of embedded propaganda which elegantly use the psycholinguistic concept contained in the idea "The Fish do not see the Water". In Communication Studies, Propaganda Studies, even Neuro-Linguistic Programming NLP( which, while it is a controversial system, is based on common-sense "slight of mind" techniques.) the Sandwich Formula of:
/true statement -> statement intended to be perceived as true -> true statement/
is being used here. Example: 6 o'clock news, tired Americans sit down to eat and watch the news. In the middle of verifiable and true information segments a VNR is placed, so the end effect of 'Rain tomorrow //-> VNR Information //-> Gas is up by 1 cent' is to believe 3 new facts, not 2 and one to question.

My 2 cents,