> People are actually a bit resistant to "Low-quality and misleading information". We can see people generally turning to higher quality sources than have previously been available which is why everything is getting fragmented.

Do you have anything to back this up or is this just your opinion on the situation?

A lot of times when I see people online complaining about the mainstream media and talking about how alternative sources are better they end up linking to something that is way less trustworthy, but it aligns with their existing beliefs. Maybe it's just my experience, but I rarely see people going "CNN is shit, so here's a ProPublica article". It's usually "CNN is shit, so here's an article from truth-and-freedom.ru."

I agree that the mainstream media isn't as high quality as they make it out to be, but, on average, I don't feel like alternative sources are any better.