I feel like that's a very naive way to look at it. Lots of entities have enough capital to get a news company going, the problem is profitability and long-term

I feel like that's a very naive way to look at it. Lots of entities have enough capital to get a news company going, the problem is profitability and long-term sustainability. Not to mention running an actual news agency. Just because a company is profitable in one area doesn't mean they're guaranteed success in another. How are companies like Facebook supposed to solve this problem? Where is the money to pay for these journalists going to come from? The ad revenue generated by that wing of their company? If it was that easy, then existing media companies wouldn't be struggling. If you're counting on there being synergy between their existing userbase then I don't think it's worth it because there's so many risks. If a company starts pushing a certain type of news, their credibility and their brand would be so closely tied together with their news branch that either the news would be very bland and have a n agenda while also potentially alienating a large portion of users. This could very well lead to killing their main product. Companies like google are already under fire for being partial. Add in them actively writing about things like politics and it'd be like adding a barrel of oil. Not to mention the anti-trust laws involved. Companies like the ones you mentioned are already overpowered let alone giving them the keys to present actual news.