Information Salad
Why We're Canceling Legacy Media and What Comes Next
The High Cost of News
Glen Taylor, the billionaire owner of the Minnesota Timberwolves and the Minnesota Star Tribune, is selling the team for $1.5 billion to Marc Lore and Alex Rodriguez. With a net worth nearing $3 billion, Taylor is Minnesota’s richest resident—and still, the Minnesota Star Tribune is hiking subscription prices and shedding experienced staff.
Recently, the paper offered buyouts to employees whose age and tenure add up to 65 or more. The effort is framed as part of publisher Steve Grove’s digital expansion plan. But we see it as another example of experienced journalism being hollowed out under the guise of “innovation.”
We’ve been subscribers for years, but we’re done. $49.27 every 13 weeks is too steep. At that cost it is about $70 more a year than the New York Times. It’s not about the absence of good writers or photographers. It’s about value—and the richest man in the state asking readers to pay more while cutting newsroom staff isn’t something we want to support.
Television: Still Not Worth It
We recently signed up for TV service so our son could watch the NBA playoffs. It reminded us of why we stopped paying for it in the first place. Despite dozens of channels, there’s rarely anything we want to watch, and the commercials are more pervasive than we remembered. We tried to watch CNN’s coverage of the unrest in L.A., but the staging of conservatives and liberals to provoke arguments and shouting matches exhausted us after about 10 minutes.
Finding Better Alternatives
Without print or TV, where do we turn? Mostly newsletters and independent outlets. Many are written by former journalists covering national topics with clarity and integrity. We’d rather pay these writers directly than subsidize bloated media companies.
We still read the New York Times. And we used to support MPR—$15 a month for years, even donating two cars. But our listening dropped off, and eventually, so did our payments. The pattern is familiar: if the value or interest isn’t there, we move on.
Podcasts and the Left’s Messaging Problem
Podcasts fill much of the space once occupied by traditional media. But Democrats are struggling to get a foothold. Podcasts have become a significant topic of debate among the party elite. Michael Hirschorn, chief executive of Ish Entertainment, wrote a guest essay about them for The New York Times. Democrats are struggling to figure out how to reach male voters, particularly those under 35. Some believe that if they can build a podcast universe with its own version of Joe Rogan, they might stand a chance of winning that demographic back. Hirschorn, like many, has his doubts:
“So maybe instead of disdaining these guys... Democrats should be taking a deeper lesson... Relearn how to talk like nonpoliticians.” — Michael Hirschorn
The right has Joe Rogan, Andrew Schulz, Tim Dillon, and Theo Von. These voices resonate not because they’re always right, but because they sound real. They aren't filtered through the professionalized tone of politics or academia. That authenticity builds trust—even when the message is messy.
The Bluesky Bubble
Last—and maybe least—is social media. The preferred platform of the left is Bluesky, a platform similar to X/Twitter that many flocked to after Elon Musk made X/Twitter unusable for large swaths of its former audience. But Bluesky, like other platforms, may be inadvertently harming liberal causes in several ways:
Disinformation and Visual Manipulation
Steven Lee Myers, writing for The New York Times in his article Fake Images and Conspiracy Theories Swirl Around L.A. Protests, outlines how social media is used to manipulate public opinion. According to Myers:
Misleading photographs, videos, and text have spread widely on social media as protests against immigrant raids have unfolded in Los Angeles, rehashing old conspiracy theories and expressing support for President Trump’s actions.
The flood of falsehoods appeared intended to stoke outrage toward immigrants and political leaders, principally Democrats.
They also contributed to confusion over what was actually happening on the streets, with digital and social media portraying events through sharply divergent ideological lenses. Many posts created the false impression that the entire city was engulfed in violence, when in reality, clashes were limited to a small area.
These images often feel powerful and immediate. It’s easy to get pulled into hours of scrolling—especially during breaking news. But skepticism is essential. False content can reach hundreds of thousands before it’s debunked. That’s what happened with a viral image of a stack of bricks, falsely claimed to be staged for protesters to throw.
Ideological Purity and Internal Policing
Beyond disinformation, social media is also home to a toxic mix of imposters, right-wing provocateurs, well-meaning journalists, and ultra-left ideologues. The latter often do more harm than good to liberal causes. Their relentless litmus-testing discourages complexity and nuance—both essential for building a persuasive message.
On the left, if a politician, columnist, or podcaster says something that doesn’t align perfectly with progressive orthodoxy, they’re often attacked without hesitation. For instance, if someone suggests that protesters carrying flags of Mexico or Palestine may hurt their cause, they’re immediately vilified. Their reputation is questioned, and everything they’ve written is put under suspicion—even if their intent was simply to explore an idea or assess its impact.
Lessons from Joe Rogan—and an Uncertain Future
According to Media Monitors, Rogan’s audience is 71 percent male. Bloomberg estimates that in February 2025, his podcast had 51.5 million downloads and plays. A Democratic startup called AND Media (short for Achieve Narrative Dominance) hopes to raise $70 million to fund online influencers. But they have a long way to go if they hope to build a functioning network before the midterms. This kind of manufactured grassroots support is often referred to as astroturfing.
The party’s issues go deeper. Even Ken Martin, Minnesota’s longtime DFL chair and now DNC head, was caught on tape expressing regret over taking the job. It’s one more crack in a fractured institution.
Meanwhile, younger voters—especially men—are tuning out or turning away. And Democrats, consumed by internal policing, will be challenged to reclaim them.
Final Thought
The Minnesota Star Tribune still publishes relevant stories. Tonight, for example, they have one explaining that the raid on Lake Street and other locations was preceded by a meth seizure valued at over $22 million. We hope the cuts Steve Grove is making will result in a stronger paper that attracts more readers. However, Glen Taylor seems unwilling to invest further in the paper—a signal that confidence may be waning. The organization has even set up a nonprofit in an effort to convince readers to support local news. Along with their new name and branding, they claim to have a plan for creating a sustainable model for local journalism. Apparently, that plan includes buyouts for their most experienced employees.
There are two major things wrong with journalism today. I suspect both of these things pay dividends to media outlets in the short term, but push consumers away in the long term.
First, bias of the reporter and/or media outlet. Truth is the sum of all facts. Media consumers shouldn’t have to read/watch a dozen sources to get a reasonable idea of what’s going on. The polarization we have today is a direct result of bias, both in traditional and social media.
Second is the sensationalism inherent to how media outlets get paid. Outlets are incentivized to portray extremes, even where extremes are either uncommon or even untrue. Like the TV journalist paddling a canoe through ankle-deep water after heavy rain, like the singular focus on isolated protests in LA.
Sensationalism in journalism is not new—“yellow journalism “ was coined in the mid-1800’s. News reports have always required critical thinking. That said, larger newspapers are held to higher standards than online sources, so we are better off as a region with a “paper of record”. The hollowed out Strib doesn’t serve that function that well. I liked their recent project around the 5th year anniversary of The Floyd uprising but generally the daily paper writes little of interest, relying on news feeds I can more completely read via my NYT or WSJ subscriptions.