The FCC used to have a "fairness doctrine." If a network had a broadcast license, it was required to present controversial issues in a balanced manner, present

The FCC used to have a "fairness doctrine." If a network had a broadcast license, it was required to present controversial issues in a balanced manner, presenting different points of view. This meant that the news segments were boring, not flashy. The news departments of networks were money losers. The doctrine was abolished in 1987. The news became much more entertaining. Now you have lots of mud-slinging, bias, and name-calling, and a lot less reasoned debate and thought. Network news departments now make a lot of money. In order to make more money, you need more advertisers. If you have high-paying advertisers, you can't offend them. That means that there are many topics, especially corporate-funded takeovers of regulatory agencies, which aren't covered at all. You never hear CNN or Fox News talk about the revolving door between the FDA and big pharma, or the USDA and big ag, or between the SEC and big banks, or between defense contractors and the CIA. Neither "left-wing" nor "right-wing" networks wants to talk about that, because it would decrease their profits. Viewers can sense this. They're not made of stone. That's why they don't trust the media. (I wrote "left-" and "right-" in quotes, because there aren't any left-wing networks at all, but that's another issue).