> A random bloke on the Internet just is trying to optimize for 1 problem, getting the right answer
Most random folks on the internet seem to be optimizing for dopamine hits, not correct answers. Anyone with an audience is optimizing for subscription uptake, which seems to reliably lead in the opposite direction from correct answers.
> Stuff about "mainstream [media] outlets" shunning all "decent journalists"
This kind of silliness does nothing but weaken the rest of your arguments, IMO.
Your comment about most people online optimizing for something like a hit of dopamine is correct. However, just FYI, I clarified later in that same section that my comment was referring to "well-intentioned" people. Obviously that's a bit subjective and harder to delineate, but makes an important distinction.
And just FYI, I never said "all" journalists, I was only referring to most, a not altogether uncommon opinion.
Most random folks on the internet seem to be optimizing for dopamine hits, not correct answers. Anyone with an audience is optimizing for subscription uptake, which seems to reliably lead in the opposite direction from correct answers.
> Stuff about "mainstream [media] outlets" shunning all "decent journalists"
This kind of silliness does nothing but weaken the rest of your arguments, IMO.