I think I am with you on your first sentence being a way forward. Substack is pretty interesting in that regard.
I run into some issues with your use of Taibbi as a good anecdote though for unbiased reporting, and I won't touch your MSM comment.
I think Taibbi is a competent, honest, and candid reporter. That said, I was around during his coverage of GS in the Rolling Stone in '08-'09.
Is he good at speaking truth to power and creating compelling narratives? Yes. But he's biased in his coverage in the same way that Greenwald is. I don't necessarily agree with blurring* the line between OpEd and reporting is the direction that solves the disconnect.
Additionally, honest, citizen journalists with independent funding can misunderstand tech the same way a NYT reporter can. It's still a complex field only getting more complex.
I agree Taibbi is biased, what makes him a good example for a new model of journalism is that his bias is a) clear and b) not hegemonic. Let a thousand Taibbis bloom each with their own worldview, hangups and bugbears. That seems like a much healthier landscape than the boring, hegemonic left-y (but not Bernie lefty, because his fans are sooo mean online) milieu that we have now.
I run into some issues with your use of Taibbi as a good anecdote though for unbiased reporting, and I won't touch your MSM comment.
I think Taibbi is a competent, honest, and candid reporter. That said, I was around during his coverage of GS in the Rolling Stone in '08-'09.
Is he good at speaking truth to power and creating compelling narratives? Yes. But he's biased in his coverage in the same way that Greenwald is. I don't necessarily agree with blurring* the line between OpEd and reporting is the direction that solves the disconnect.
Additionally, honest, citizen journalists with independent funding can misunderstand tech the same way a NYT reporter can. It's still a complex field only getting more complex.