Beware their "experts"... There's a very heavy bias in their opinions...
"When we spoke to some news avoiders who had tried at various points to kind of re-engage with news or to develop a habit that they never had in the first place, they talked about how difficult it is to make sense of what’s going on in these stories. They also say there’s too much jargon in them."
"A lot of the news avoiders we interviewed who were not voting would often point to this feeling that they just didn’t think they knew enough to vote. They have the sense of having no agency. News consumption and political engagement are intertwined and they reinforce each other in this kind of spiral. From a public policy standpoint, it’s hard to see what’s going to be most effective at solving that puzzle.
You do see differences by country, though. Places that have a lot more investment in public service media have much higher rates of engagement with news and more political engagement. That’s currently a non-starter in the U.S. But that’s one solution that some say is increasingly necessary, given the market failure around local news."
Of course, a lefty "expert" wrote this... And boiled down, what they are saying is uncontested state-run news is needed to brainwash people into compliance... "Currently a non-starter in the US" equals bitching the First Amendment won't allow them to censor what they don't like...
