I think I am with you on your first sentence being a way forward. Substack is pretty interesting in that regard.

I run into some issues with your use of Taibbi as a good anecdote though for unbiased reporting, and I won't touch your MSM comment.

I think Taibbi is a competent, honest, and candid reporter. That said, I was around during his coverage of GS in the Rolling Stone in '08-'09.

Is he good at speaking truth to power and creating compelling narratives? Yes. But he's biased in his coverage in the same way that Greenwald is. I don't necessarily agree with blurring* the line between OpEd and reporting is the direction that solves the disconnect.

Additionally, honest, citizen journalists with independent funding can misunderstand tech the same way a NYT reporter can. It's still a complex field only getting more complex.

He is certainly biased, but he at least is willing to write unpopular things. Most of these NYT-times will write anything to get more twitter follows.

I agree Taibbi is biased, what makes him a good example for a new model of journalism is that his bias is a) clear and b) not hegemonic. Let a thousand Taibbis bloom each with their own worldview, hangups and bugbears. That seems like a much healthier landscape than the boring, hegemonic left-y (but not Bernie lefty, because his fans are sooo mean online) milieu that we have now.

That's a good take on it, I agree.

> "the rise of citizen journalism"

The only citizens who will be able to expend the time and resources to do more than superficial reporting will either have a Paul Bunyan-sized axe to grind or be funded by someone else. In neither case will they be unbiased.