Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe this analysis is subjective, politically biased in itself, or otherwise predicated on a "narrow interpretation" of the facts. All things

Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe this analysis is subjective, politically biased in itself, or otherwise predicated on a "narrow interpretation" of the facts. All things for which Salon is known. Regardless, people tend not to utilize resources such as X as they do traditional format media websites such as Wikipedia. Wherein the "editorial board's" presentation of the facts are one's only option for consumption. To suggest that consumers utilize these differing formats similarly is the introduction of a false premise into an argument that, ironically, proports to wish to prosecute a source of false premises. When looking at sources such as X, early on people tend to have multiple accounts that they look to for information. The point being to survey multiple sources of information toward ferreting out what is probably most true. Sources that are more consistent, in that, later tend to be seen as reliable. They then get more attention per their track record as experienced by readers. The viewer market of X punishes accounts that are percieved to routinely engage in lies. Even if lying accounts remain stuck in the "filter" of X. While some lies have had the chance to rise to the top, though arguably at a lesser rate than when being laundered through MSM editorial baords, the dominant effect has obviously been to punish propaganda. Compare this process to Wikipedia's type of engagement. Which is a site that has a bottom-barrel reputation for stubborn bias specifically in the realm of any page that deals in political topics. And within which there is no opportunity to seek out alternate takes or information sources. That's not to say that Wikipedia doesn't get it right. But that X and wikipedia are not comparable media sources. And that the individualized trust process for readers is more important in 2023. Than it is to validate with engagement more traditional formats that have to thread the needle of their no-option propaganda, in order to point to whatever it is that you are supposed to be happy about them being truthful over for a single cherry picked topic or even one peice of information.