FWIW the headline was more persuasive than the article, which draws an odd analogy between open source (trustworthy without auditing the code due to being audit

FWIW the headline was more persuasive than the article, which draws an odd analogy between open source (trustworthy without auditing the code due to being audited by many other people) and news (not always trustworthy despite being audited by many people) and bafflingly concludes that the reason that people can't faithfully discern what happened with 99% certainty by reading a broad range of headlines is due to censorship. Perhaps the author's experience of the real world is based entirely on reading headlines.