The comments here reflect a lot of backlash against mainstream media. To some extent, I could see it being a simple reflection of the media being drawn toward b

The comments here reflect a lot of backlash against mainstream media. To some extent, I could see it being a simple reflection of the media being drawn toward bad but eye-catching stories. I've heard from many outlets that the media is drawn to this because it's lucrative - and the rise of technology disrupted their traditional funding sources. Pissing people off through their stories wound up being the only way to make money. It'd only be natural then that after decades of swinging towards "birdbox stories" the media would itself be associated with the negative emotions it's been living off (as in the movie where people use a birds in a box to sense when overpowering forces are nearby). If you live off someone else's largess then you quickly become associated with them intimately. The trouble is, journalism does fill a necessary need within society. Frankly, people are going to "talk" and without someone having a reputation for holding themselves to a standard somewhere the "talk" will back the ruling elite's objectives. I don't have the systemic answer - but tech being the initial problem and this being a good place to discuss technical issues - the people here could probably figure out some potential options and see what springs forth. Personally, I learned how to read the news in public school and through cross sampling from multiple outlets. Every story's got to answer the five "W"s (who, what, when, where and why). If a story has similar photos/names/content across multiple outlets then that's probably close to what happened. Over time, I've watched the rise of the "birdbox" stories and developed a thicker skin towards them. More personally, I grew up with a parent and a large set of relatives who wanted to rebel against anything and everything without any need for justification. Sometimes it's because it makes them look smart and they like how people treat them with authority. Sometimes it's because they were wronged by someone in authority somewhere and rebellion feels like a form of righting a perceived wrong. Definitely, if a conspiracy theory landed in their laps they were receptive especially when there wasn't any evidence - just another way of bucking the trend and rebelling. I've learned these rebellions are fundamentally destructive. Society would quickly get turned over to something more like Mad Max and regional warlords if my rebellious family were in the majority. Though sometimes society definitely is in the wrong - as in the times of slavery or oppression of women (neither of those is a US-only past practice, btw). The news does fill a fundamental need even in its current state. But it definitely needs reformation. Probably, there's a way to fund proper journalism without burning the house down.