Deep reporting and meaningful analysis takes expertise and time, both of which cost money.

If reporting is becoming irrelevant and shallow, we (collectively) have only ourselves to blame by not supporting (with money) deep investigative journalism.

It is a bit lazy to blame the consumer for the lack of quality. Kind of a light version of how consumption but not production is blamed for the climate disaster.

Spending your own money on quality news papers is not the only way to support good journalism. You could also ask your national government to spend more tax money towards your national media company (if you have one) or towards subsidizing independent ones. Or you could champion pro-consumer legislation which might prevent ad monopolies like google from swallowing most of the ad revenue.

Asking consumers to spend their money correctly is probably the least effective way of increasing the quality of production.

I agree, but the article is talking about an event that happened a year ago and how the main actor in said event has not had much social media presence in the last 8 months. They have had plenty of time.

I don’t see the point of journalism, so maybe nobody is to blame.

Between authors, podcasts, youtubers, and the sheer amount of raw data out there, I think we can do away with the whole concept of “news”

Gotta put raw info into digestible formats for the masses.

There’s no way to do that without value judgements. Let the masses do it for themselves. All you need are a few dozen data-driven bloggers per million people.