> Should I really bemoan the loss of a system in which a handful of individuals picked the news which was deemed worthy of publication or air-time? What is a b

> Should I really bemoan the loss of a system in which a handful of individuals picked the news which was deemed worthy of publication or air-time? What is a better alternative? I'm not sure I know an answer. Crowd-sourcing editorial decisions doesn't seem useful. The crowd lacks expertise to judge what is important, at least in many fields. Also, they (well, we) censor what is unpopular or uncomfortable. Also, outside algorithmic aggregators like Google News, editors still make the decisions. Consider tech news. Would the general public do a good job of which tech stories are significant? (Hacker News readers are a specialized subset, and still I don't agree with most editorial decisions.) It's the same in economics, domestic policy, foreign policy, etc.