Yeah, the headline is pretty lame. CNN frequently misuses headlines at an attempt to make the news more entertaining.

"Fear him"?  Most Christian theologians don't fear him, but dismiss him.  I don't mean this disrespectfully, like who he is or what he has to say is of now value.  But the reason they dismiss him is because he takes things that have been known and or addressed over the centuries and introduces them as if he discovered them and they are dramatic new findings.  Ehrman then ignore facts and evidence that are contrary to his view and publishes simplified versions for public sale and consumption.  As you can see, CNN finds him to be a great "sound bite".

As for Ehrman's being disappointed that God has not "caused" an original manuscript to be found, I find this mostly amusing.  His justification for his decision is God's fault.  Now that is disciplined and reasoned theology. 

What do you perceive the agenda is "on the other side of the aisle"?

As you note: But the reason they dismiss him is because he takes things that have been known and or addressed over the centuries and introduces them as if he discovered them and they are dramatic new findings.
Tell me that there is anything really new about the issues that haven't been addressed over the centuries. His side of the aisle is just a different viewpoint that is as you say simplified into layman's terms so that the average person can understand what academia has been discussing in academia for centuries.  That is the newness to his thoughts. He throws in historical data for reference and explains the political maneuvering of the church and how that may have changed the original thoughts that the authors had.

In my opinion "the other side of the aisle" agenda is to give the average person reasons why they should not have to determine the correctness, or validity of church doctrine. Merely, that it is "The Book" and therefore infallible and interpretations should be done by theologians only and anyone questioning those interpretations who is not a theologian are obviously not qualified. That an average person does not have the ability to comprehend the mysteries of "The Book".

Lee Strobel writes his entire book in that format.  The questions he raises while valid are answered by debating both sides of the aisle. Unfortunately his side of the aisle gets to handle the "grapefruit" softball questions, while the opposing side is mocked and discounted within the first paragraph of his question. 

Sorry,  I was talking about his questions to interviewees.  but, I do agree with your assessment.