I have been following some News stories in depth recently and honestly you can find more neutral coverage and better analysis on some random YouTube video or re

I have been following some News stories in depth recently and honestly you can find more neutral coverage and better analysis on some random YouTube video or reddit thread then you do on professional print / tv journalism (which given the sort of biased and selective reporting I see on both sides is either deliberately misleading or completely incompetent) At this point I think the problem to solve isn’t “journalism“. The problem is the level of respect we as a society give to traditional journalism. I think traditional journalism had 3 functions: 1. Spread Information 2. Curate Information 3. Conduct investigation/ long form analysis. ———— 1. Has been made obsolete by the internet 2. Has been hijacked by algorithms that seek to maximize attention to ads, and therefore inadvertently outrage. I think there is some opportunity for a tech enabled disruption here. 3. Is tremendously valuable. I am not sure what the funding model looks like. But I think we will figure out a solution at some point. I see no value in trying to save legacy journalism. The only reason we accord it so much prestige is due to social inertia from a bygone era. Why I should give CNN or Fox any more credibility than I would give a TiKTok video at this point? Or value a New York Times article on covid more than listening to a couple podcasts with subject matter experts and looking at the data online ? I think we need to embrace the internet. There are issues with curation, but possibly solutions as well. For eg. Maybe we can empower users to choose their own social media curation algorithms and control their feed. Rather than trying to sell their attention to the highest bidder. We would need to find a different monetization model etc.