They shouldn't. This is a byproduct of the failure of journalistic filtering. However biased, journalistic outlets used to have a role and a purpose: apply a fi

They shouldn't. This is a byproduct of the failure of journalistic filtering. However biased, journalistic outlets used to have a role and a purpose: apply a filter to the enormous amount of information the new media society generates; stick by the truth coming from facts. What tipped it all over is the advent of three things: 24h news channels, demanding a spectacularization of news to fill an entire day of broadcasting; the Web, of course; the need to find a way for monetizing news on the Web, that led to dancing with the devil of online advertisement. We're currently in a phase where the shortcomings of the ad based business model for media are clear to everyone. How many previously respectable outlets have already burnt their integrity at the altar of clickbait and ads for the sake of keeping the lights on? What we are witnessing with fake news is what happens when a balancing power of society (media) is losing its grip and importance. The problem here being that the actors who are actively weakening that power (Google and Facebook) don't want to affirm a different flavor of that power. It's only about the money.