What leads us astray is a failure to invest (intellectually) in the news as much as previous generations did. Some of this isn't a sign of intelligence, it's just a question of how people spend their time.
Are people willing to read a full page analysis, and are they willing to wait while someone dredges up the tidbits to make that page? Or, are they at least willing to do their own research? Not really, and I think that's the real point of the article. It's not that sources are necessarily bad, but that it takes time to know which are good. Ironically, the impatience that gave us instant access to information has now created so much information that it takes more time to process it all.
Twitter is just the latest example of being able to instantly talk to the world, and it feeds on everyone's impatience. News organizations know this too, that's why we have a culture of "breaking news" where all that's needed for relevance is to be the channel that brought you the story: even if there is no story yet, and you're seeing 4 hours of pontificating over a recycled video clip.
You are right, but Twitter (and, really, anything on the Internet) has the new feature of being persistent. Rumors in a crowd die out when more information comes to light. The unfailing memory of the Internet, combined with anonymity and its massive reach, creates an echo chamber that can reinforce false information long after the truth has been revealed.
Are people willing to read a full page analysis, and are they willing to wait while someone dredges up the tidbits to make that page? Or, are they at least willing to do their own research? Not really, and I think that's the real point of the article. It's not that sources are necessarily bad, but that it takes time to know which are good. Ironically, the impatience that gave us instant access to information has now created so much information that it takes more time to process it all.
Twitter is just the latest example of being able to instantly talk to the world, and it feeds on everyone's impatience. News organizations know this too, that's why we have a culture of "breaking news" where all that's needed for relevance is to be the channel that brought you the story: even if there is no story yet, and you're seeing 4 hours of pontificating over a recycled video clip.