We love to demonize the press. The "mainstream media". They are out to manipulate us.
Some of the more extreme argue that we should just get all our news and information (and therefore facts) from the uncensored, uncurated social media platforms, like Twitter. "Straight from the horse's mouth".
I cannot say that there isn't a piece of this argument that I can side with. I don't want others deciding what I shouldn't see, I also don't want others to decide what is the top story. But still, I appreciate if someone curates the news for me, according to my taste. This is where an algorithm can make all the sense, but not the doomscroll algorithm tuned to my darkest vices, but one that I can tune to my highest aspirations, to shape my brain in the direction of the person I want to be.
I also appreciate if someone has taken the time to check the facts, I would love to be sure that what I am reading has been proven true to the best extent available.
Here is where I digress: I may be suspicious about the dying but still dominating structure of media companies, but my grudge will never be with professional, hard-working, ethical journalists. Obviously, journalists come in all colors, but professional journalism (the craft, not the institutions), are held against standards that give the public a better quality product: journalists have the responsibility to check their facts, if they don't, is considered negligence; that's way better than the random person with a Twitter account.
Just like the Napster and Spotify lovers never had anything against the artists, on the contrary, we adopted these new platforms out of sheer love for the music they create; most of us want to get our news directly from those content creators that we esteem, but we want it to be good.