I feel the opposite. Having to sift through the bullshit and separate feeling from opinion from guess from estimate from fact, when they're all presented the sa

I feel the opposite. Having to sift through the bullshit and separate feeling from opinion from guess from estimate from fact, when they're all presented the same way (often through a lens of indignation and outrage) is much harder than coming up with my own interpretations and narratives from impassive "boring" presentations. Take scientific reporting. How often is the long many paragraph article written by e.g. bbc ridiculously wrong compared to the few sentence abstract of the paper itself? Sure, I'm not going to understand it all, but the misleading mainstream article that does the work of doing interpretation and narrative for me is more likely to make it worse than better.