Thank you for both replies. I have been hit hard with work (I'm building my own house and work full time) so it's been hard to formulate a response and research. What I was going to do is try to email all of these journalists and ask for their honest opinion about the story. That's it.
This episode details what happened when factual errors were brought to their attention. It's what good-faith journalists do and I think you'll recognize that.
Going forward:
When a story generates a strong response in you,
I urge you to consider whether the source of that story
can be trusted to perform good faith journalism,
(comparable to what's done in the TAL link above).
A good faith journalist can put out high or low quality content, mostly depending on their wisdom and skill.
But a content creator operating in bad faith - all they can do is craft counterproductive, toxic narratives¹.
Before asking others to consume Shirley's content, fully determine that Shirley is acting in good faith. Besides being kind, it's also due diligence.
¹(by cherry picking unrelated facts, by disingenuously tying those facts together, by innuendo, by debunked research and by supporting all of it with other bad faith content)
