Journalism's definition is reports of novelty which interest readers/listeners. Failing to interest an audience is commercial failure, thus irrelevance.The rules such as "if it bleeds, it leads" follow from that. The rules of journalism filter out what will be important to our posterity, and put trivia under a microscope.
But it's not true that journalists have no interest in old things; every five years we are treated to a retrospective on Watergate.
I know there is a fine line here with what I am going to propose, but somehow we have to get back to having "The Press" do what it was intended to do by The Founding Fathers. Now if that means getting the profit motive out of it, that's what has to be tried. I don't know how this is to be done.
We, of course, can't really have a government run "Department of News". But, somehow, there has to be an effort made in this country to gert real true news to the people.
I have to go now, but would like to talk about this. It is of great importance.
Once The Media is so influential in molding political opinion, then the media RULES, and those few who own and operate the majority of the media RULE. And that's the way it is presently.
Without that "watchdog", there is no country, no real freedom.
And as old Walter used to say, "and that's the way it is" (today). There is no watchdog.