When reading NYT comment sections, I always sort, but never by the editor's picks. I rely solely on reader's most recommended. This is the best bullshit filter

When reading NYT comment sections, I always sort, but never by the editor's picks. I rely solely on reader's most recommended. This is the best bullshit filter I've found, and I can see why lazy, dishonest, poorly informed, or otherwise sub-par journalists resent it. I do something similar when reading HN. Scrolling through the headlines, I (almost) never click on the link itself. Instead, I open the discussion tabs, make a snap judgement about the quality of the piece from there, and click through only when it's clearly worthwhile. The ease with which this filter can be applied is the most amazing thing. At this point, it feels so fluid and natural that I do it reflexively. A few years ago news outlets were coming to terms with the idea that there was no front page online. Yes, some readers did go to the outlets home page and decide what to read from there. But more often than not, they were coming directly to a piece that would have been buried in a print edition. The social layer further diminishes editorial control, in that people can further economize their quotient of attention by finding and trusting informal social groups that reduce the megaphone effect enjoyed by the analog press even further.