> average reporters of that period, with a decent patronage; just documenting things on paper as they hear/research/study it; without the intention of publishing for widespread readership.

We don’t really have that anymore though right?

The current internet is economy strongly incentivizes people to write things in favor of engagement.

Sometimes this aligns with ground truth (e.g. Gergely Orosz, who has documented Musk’s Twitter takeover via daily updates). Many times it does not.

Who is supposed to be the historical record keeper, at this time, when trust in record keepers is at an all time low?

I find myself uncomfortable asking such controversial questions, but I do feel like they should be asked