I think one can insulate themselves from the worst of the noise with some very selective follows/blocks/etc,

But anyway, re: your comment on the worst offenders, a related quote that came across my twitter this weekend-

"The surest way to work up a crusade in favor of some good cause is to promise people they will have a chance of maltreating someone. To be able to destroy with good conscience - this is the height of psychological luxury, the most delicious of moral treats" - Aldous Huxley

Journos are the new clerics. The western moral compass

There's probably a better way to frame this in a context where journalists are increasingly under attack just for doing their jobs.

https://cpj.org/2020/12/in-2020-u-s-journalists-faced-unprec...

That (better) framing would probably need to involve making a distinction between legitimate (eg investigative) journalists versus primarily-twitter-covering psuedo-tabloid journalists, which is rather fraught at the best of times, since most authorities (formal or informal) have a obvious incentive to misclassify legitimate journalists as tabloidists, and a less obvious incentive to misclassify tabloids as legitimate journalism. (This gets much worse if you try to do anything material with the distiction, thanks to [0].) Not that it's impossible, but I'm not optimistic.

Besides, there were plenty of clergy who were otherwise fairly decent people.

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law

Well it's also hard to blame journalists for writing the kind of stuff that gets clicks, which is what gets them all paid.

On the contrary it’s important that they know the damage it do to society.

I'm not sure if it's correlated - but journalists have also been doing a far worse job than I've experienced previously.

Due to a decline in income from advertisers many traditional media have fired a lot of journalists. The remaining ones are under great pressure to produce articles. So it is not surprising that the quality of journalism has declined.