It used to be that dissemination of information was expensive. Thousands of years ago you had to travel to town squares or churches to get updates on things.

It used to be that dissemination of information was expensive. Thousands of years ago you had to travel to town squares or churches to get updates on things. Then you had newspapers, radio, and television. These often were pillars of a community. So it was logical that the same devices that would report on news ("free-press" activity) would be used for "free-speech" expressive activity like commentary, editoral, op-ed, letters to the community, etc., because it was media that a high percentage of the community was guaranteed to consume regularly. This is no longer true and also no longer needed. Free-press and free-speech activity doesn't have to share the same platform anymore and can be separated. Free-speech expressive activity can be done on websites, social media, etc. We don't need journalism outlets to do anything but post reports on things happening. With the two separated there is less ethical quandary. The idea of scheduled consumption of media is also breaking down. So we don't need journalism outlets collecting stories and deciding what to put into papers, because there shouldn't be a paper. There should be a website with reports with easily searchable keywords.