What do you mean by a ‘net of trust’?
This sort of thing seems to have, however, somewhat broken down in recently years. At a minimum I think most people would say these networks are at least smaller and more insular than they were in the past.
If it's all in good faith, this might not be so terrible. If the aforementioned trusted CEOs faithfully and accurately are able to point out media they believe is trustworthy and keep an eye on those outlets, it could potentially work as a way to kick start the rejuvenation of these networks.
Now, this relies on these CEOs being both trusted and trustworthy. That is a fairly substantial assumption in my opinion.
But if it's all in good faith it's possible to read this as not Orwellian at all, but rather more informing a section of the community that there is something they can do for the community, and then asking them to do it.
But the media aren’t trustworthy. That’s how we got to this place. If that gets fixed, then indeed CEOs can celebrate it, but the problem is with the media right now, not the lack of people cheering them on.
Americas understanding of the world could be said to be diverging because of self selection of content in people's respective echo chambers but I don't think it apt to say it's because the media is less trustworthy just because they are less trusted.
Can you provide objective criteria to suggest that the accuracy of the news has declined?
That's true, and it might only extend the trust-issues. You get someone to embrace a not-trustworthy institution and vouch for them, the trust in them will fade away as well.
Then the graphs will look great. Problem solved!
