[greggoB]

> None of them involve making fun of people for doing it.

I'm expressing frustration at the lack of a proper answer, which you still seem to not be able to provide.

> Who primed them?

Conspiracy theory influencers, cult leaders, unscrupulous politicians, other people with existing mental illnesses, corporations with a lobbying agenda - the list is as long as there are people with a motive to influence the populace to their own gains.

> Here's a 'fun' and illustrative story

You're providing a single example (without any references, btw) as a means of exonerating your entire argument. But sure, pizzagate is suddenly looking a lot less dismissible out-of-hand now, given we've come to learn the sheer extent of Epstein's web.

I agree that much of the disinformation re global warming is at least funded by corporations and individuals with a profit motive; I agree that the concentrated ownership of the media and wealth are highly problematic.

But pumping the "do your own research" schtick and ignoring that it is a term highly co-opted by conspiracy theorists (as well as others with an agenda to misinform) is hardly helping.

So again, I ask: what is your concrete alternative to Fourth Estate?

[Schmerika]

> So again, I ask: what is your concrete alternative to Fourth Estate?

Sorry, you think the choice is between people doing their own research or having a 4th estate?

How odd. I don't know if I've ever met anyone with such a binary.

To be as clear as I possibly can, though I did already answer this: doing your own research and having actual journalism exist are not mutually exclusive things. They go very well together.

However, as the quality of media falls, the necessity to do your own research to get an accurate worldview increases.