Social media personalities aren't replacements for actual journalism. Tons of Twittermill journalism just ends up being dead wrong, misinformed, or missing a ton of key context.
so in order to get closer to the actual truth what you want is a massive variety of perspectives and opinions so one can actually synthesize this to get closer to the truth or at least a well-educated perspective on the subject.
which is what modern media gives to you.
versus the old guard who present things in a very specific way.
FIFY
whoever gets you that information faster wins
even the old news outlets try to out-compete each other for speed to press.
I personally think smart people are able to filter through a lot of information and synthesize the relevant.
it's also arguable that you get closer to the truth with the diversity of opinions about a subject on modern media and once again this is better for smart people to make up thier minds about something.
That's just not how it works.
Most people are more interested in accuracy, context, analysis, and trustworthiness.
Sure, papers very occasionally advertise that they were the first to break a story, but this is a minuscule proportion of everything they publish, and it's not the kind of thing that people switch subscriptions over.
If you're a day trader of stocks then speed is king. But for nearly everyone else, it's not the main metric.
Lol imagine thinking you get this from big monopoly news media almost all of which are owned by private equity media conglomerates.