If you're seriously asking for my recommendation, as if that wasn't already apparent to the meanest intellect, then I would strongly suggest you look to the raw data and read informed papers on the aquisition and interpretation.
All 'news' papers, especially those that are heavily political and editorially biased (Murdoch's media empire, for example), will shape for eyeballs and reduce to the lowest common denominator.
You can see that I chose to go directly to an overview on the Global Fire Emissions Database and chose to quote directly from there.
The trite bite "Fires are actually decreasing." is meaningless sans context.
Many people do not have the time to read papers, jobs and life get in the way, which is why we use newspapers. WSJ happens to be one of the least biased papers, with a slight right lean.
Fires decreasing globally is not out of context here. I find that information interesting. Sure fires are increasing in other places but it seems to me your main concern is around people hearing that fires globally are decreasing.
Let me guess, I should be reading CNN, TheHill or WaPo?
If people keep demanding sensationalist news that drives people to action then you’ll end up with people that mistrust the media.