All true, and going even further, the sentences following that also falsly assume that most people _want_ to read the highest quality sources. Wrong. To use the

All true, and going even further, the sentences following that also falsly assume that most people _want_ to read the highest quality sources. Wrong. To use the author's reference to Twitter as an example, a lot of people, even very intellectual ones, use Twitter as just a way to "let steam out" so to speak, and other users only engage with content that charges them emotionally. Now adays we have days of rage, reaching major media coverage, based on trivial crap like the title of the First Lady to-be, or hell, even the picture taken for a frickin Vogue cover. Also as you said, the publishers and advertisers have a lot of the power, and they know exactly how to push the buttons of our human biases and clickbaity titles to get clicks, regardless of the quality of the actual things they are advertising. EDIT: I commented too quickly. The author quickly indeed verifies that the opposite is happening :)