I’ve gone back and forth on whether our audience wants “garbage news”.  As an editor with Neon Tommy, the most read articles are superficial listicles and social commentary with hardly any depth.  Because our news has been relocated to an online platform and everyone is ever-connected, little blurbs of up-to-date information are enough for the majority of consumers.  People want to know “it” happened, not “what” or “how” it happened. News has become somewhat of entertainment for most people, and consumers steer away from long, in-depth reporting for more fun and light hearted pieces that are in line with their interests.  Of course there will always be a need for thorough reporting in the social world, but it seems as though a paradigm shift has made that a minority.  

On a personal note, I believe there is room for both mediums.  Sites like the Huffington Post and Buzzfeed are prime examples.  For the most part their content is tailored for sheep, but hard-hitting and important news IS scattered inconspicuously throughout the site.  One wrong click and, whoops, you may actually learn something besides which Disney Princess you are.  The sites who are able to attract readership from all demographics and interests are the ones who will last the longest.  

I don’t have a problem with either approach.  Sometimes I don’t want to read a 1,200 word article about the nation’s political stance.  I’d rather sit back, and enjoy dumb pictures of cats.  But at the end of the day, I become burnt out on the mindless clicking and feel better actually reading something that is somewhat important.  I think many people can relate to this.  So my answer is this:  people want both, and both is what will always be around.  So go ahead public, have your cake and eat it, too.