Keep in mind that this is an article of pre-suasion by the CBC which justifies Canada's current approach of funding government approved journalists and media co

Keep in mind that this is an article of pre-suasion by the CBC which justifies Canada's current approach of funding government approved journalists and media companies. The argument is that if someone (government) doesn't fund and help maintain the old model of establishment media (with some left/right division) then the new economic forces will lead to its collapse. The framing being advanced here is that the collapse results in further left/right polarization as we move from objective news reporting towards self-rationalizing and subjective news analysis because that's what drives attention and clicks. This is a false framing in my opinion and only serves as a justification to protect establishment narratives using government money. Instead I would suggest that: is that the collapse of current media leaves us with a polarization between establishment/non-establishment media narratives also. It's also possible to argue (but that's not my goal here) that non/establishment polarization is greater or more threatening (to who) then the left/right polarization. The manifestation of this change is much more holistically represented in US politics by putting the typical voting blocs on a political compass map and plotting the line separating Rep/Dem for 2014 vs November 2020. Note that the shift is axial. I think this a more useful (productive) example than the proposed capitol riots (Jan6th) example or Antifa suggested by others. The axial shift is correlated with a different dimension of disagreement in the common zeitgeist. So some questions worth asking are: - Is this ok? The days of yellow journalism DID have some of the highest literacy rates in the USA. - Are you ok with a system where the government gives out financing at will to journalists/media and you may have to take them to court to get a press pass? ...like Canada? - Were we ever really objective? Should we still strive to distinguish the objective from the subjective? - Not everyone learns these words in school. Some learn (incorrectly, in my opinion) that there's a moral connotation to it. How can we do better at this? - Is it worse to lose "objectivity" in reporting or to purport to to be when we really aren't?