You are accusing me of denying the problem exists, when in fact I am not discussing any specific problem at all. You are letting your feelings take over and pa

You are accusing me of denying the problem exists, when in fact I am not discussing any specific problem at all. You are letting your feelings take over and paint me as your adversary in all things, when in fact I am not. The rise of reporting of something does not prove any increase of the actual incidents of that same thing. They are not necessarily correlated. > I'm not claiming these stories to be factual or correct, but the news being reported […] suggest the growth is likely a result of the pandemic, among other factors. You just assumed that the increase in reports correspond to an actual real phenomenon. They might, but do not have to be. > The whole point of having a free press is to have an informed public that influences government policy. The press cannot solve these problems just by publishing stories, and it is ludicrous to think that the authorities are not aware of the problems and trying to solve them. So what value does the press bring by pronouncing some problem to be the latest catastrophe? As far as I can see, all it does is give politicians a specific problem to claim to be able to solve if they were elected. But they won’t solve it, because if the problem could be solved, it probably already would be. And the damage done in the name of solving the problem may be much worse than the problem itself, if it ever was significant in the first place. Your proposed solution would make it easier for people to report one another for serious crimes, which would have the potential to ruin very many people’s lives. Likely magnitudes more people than would actually be helped. Systems where people can very easily report each other to the police (or other unaccountable overseers) tend to turn out like that.