you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]StillLessons 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

There's a chicken-egg problem hidden in your construct. You are correct that the level of discussion is pathetic now online (with some smaller markets of slightly better among the vast majority of absolute shit). But how can we generate decent discussion without a reliable universe of facts from which to begin? The fault for this isn't the news aggregator sites; it's the "news" sites themselves. When the official sources (they call themselves private companies, but let's be serious - we now have pravda) are lying outright (e.g. Hunter Biden's laptop is Russian disinfo), it makes it very difficult to generate serious conversation. To have a conversation, we have to talk about what is actually happening, and nobody is willing (official sources) or able (alternative sources) to tell us that. The smaller outlets that have the integrity don't have the resources to track down the big stories, and the organizations who have the resources are compromised and corrupt. An analogy to finish: think of a discussion as a pleasant meal with friends - it's hard to have a meal when there's no food to put on the table.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

And they keep cutting the table in half.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Those at top I think are purposely making sure communication is impossible. Why would they NOT want people to communicate even to at least for their objectives?