[mistermann]

> But in general it feels like a technical solution to a social problem- so much of what goes on in the world isn't clear or methodical, so many events that cant possibly be quantified or verified 100% by a third party- and setting the expectation that they can is IMO placing too much trust in the journalistic process. The reader should always have a seed of doubt, always question the motives of the messenger, and I just don't want that doubt to be assuaged while its still warranted.

I think it would be a good thing if people were introduced to the concept of the unknown, and learned for the first time in their life to be able to reliably identify it.

And it wouldn't be journalists doing this work, this would have to be an entirely new job role, blending skills from several disciplines (philosophy, psychology, geopolitics, etc).