All valid points. What I was trying to say is there is separation from the person and the journalist, or there should be.
Let me phrase it this way. I work for a newspaper, I have an official Twitter where I post news as a representative of that newspaper. Anything I post or share on that Twitter is editorial, it belongs to the newspaper.
I have a personal Twitter that is me being a regular citizen, a human being with thoughts, opinions, and views that may or may not line up with my employer. When I am posting as me I stop being a journalist and become a regular nobody.
That is all I am saying. If a person is writing articles for a news site and on that site they say state a RUMOR as a fact that is bad journalism. If a journalist by day posts something rumor, true, false or otherwise, on their PERSONAL Twitter, they stopped being a journalist and that is in NO WAY grounds to judge their professional integrity.
I don't know who Emily Rogers even is, or what she has said. But I am saying that if she said it on her PERSONAL Twitter it was Emily Rogers the citizen not the journalist. If she posted it on a company owned Twitter as a representative of the company she said it as a journalist. Same goes for whomever else is being trashed here, I didn't keep up.
AS far as click bait articles on less than trust worthy news sites, not all media outlets are legit news. There is such a thing as sensational journalism, have you ever heard of The National Enquirer? I am sure there are websites that are the same as that, if the site is not trust worthy or is not legit news don't read that site.
I do think more people than should accept this fallacy there is such a thing as the "mainstream media" and that they are all conspiring together one way or another. Like all gaming journalists and outlets are out to get Nintendo or whatever.