I agree the individual pieces are less polished and tend more towards alarmism or outrage. I still find it overall better, because logical inconsistencies and wrong facts will get called out viciously and without mercy. The result is a more correct worldview, but one needs to keep some distance, otherwise it can get unhealthy.
Its the difference between a university debate club and an MMA cage. The MMA filter is much stronger, but there tends to be a lot more blood.
> logical inconsistencies and wrong facts will get called out viciously and without mercy
Even here, inaccuracies are promoted as fact regularly. I don't count on the social media herd as a compass.
Other than this site I avoid news that comes with a comment section because internet anons have their own biases and agendas and aren't representative.
You end up with nuance swept aside and extreme unflinching loudmouths getting the most visibility. A lot of this goes hand in hand with quitting social media.
Its the difference between a university debate club and an MMA cage. The MMA filter is much stronger, but there tends to be a lot more blood.