This might be bad if the point of owning a newspaper was to make money.
In the era of tiktok, twitter, podcasters and other services - traditional media is just too boring source of news. I would say that even the traditional search will die sooner or later.
I prefer a good writeup like the guardian does. Not every fart needs to be "BREAKING NEWS".
I'm sure some people crave the hollow mindless screaming of random influencers but there's still mindful people out there.
And it is getting worse because media has to compete with online media.
> I'm sure some people crave the hollow mindless screaming of random influencers but there's still mindful people out there.
For sure, there are event podcasts with cool and calm discourse too. There are options.
It was never really the reason that news broadcasts aimed for fairness. They aimed for fairness because they were journalists, and they considered it a point of pride to be accurate and informative.
The broadcast networks (including Fox affiliates) still aim for that, despite the end of the fairness doctrine. But their markets have been eaten into by cable networks, some of which were explicitly founded as propaganda machines and discovered that people preferred it as entertainment.
It probably does. If your editor, boss and all your colleagues support candidate X and you come up with a story that hurts candidate X, will you really get to publish it? Will you even try to come up with such a story? I'm not saying it's impossible to get this right, but under the current climate I don't think its possible.
> This might be bad if the point of owning a newspaper was to make money.
Which implies that owner bought it not to make money but to have influence.
The savings in tax go into the billions at least.