T‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‍‍‌‍‍he paper should focus on Friedrich Hayek’s theory of disper

T‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‍‍‌‍‍he paper should focus on Friedrich Hayek’s theory of dispersed knowledge, although it was initially used in the market price analysis. But knowledge is indeed by its very nature dispersed, so dispersed that nobody claiming to be the mainstream media is capable of, or should, censor information in the name of fact-checking and thereby legitimising its assertions of self-proclaimed objectivity. In this way, when the press accuses populist misinformation, it is essentially opposing the decentralisation of information and supporting the centralisation of information, a move that is fundamentally detrimental to the truly greater digging of facts, and even more detrimental to what the press had hoped for, which was to overcome ignorance. After all, ignorance can only be overcome “not by the acquisition of more knowledge, but by the utilisation of knowledge which is and remains widely dispersed among individuals” (Hayek, 1979 p15). This literature review should therefore be a focused critique of the mainstream media, especially the liberal left, which has a long tradition of journalistic professionalism, that news that has not been examined by them is unreliable. This is why language such as fact-checking and respo‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‍‍‌‍‍nsible journalism has become popular in the last couple of years. This may be well-intentioned, but it will have the exact opposite result of the freedom of the press: when all the information is concentrated in the hands of a few elites for verdict, it will only hinder communication, not promote it. For example, in covid19 some information about the origin of the virus, masks and vaccines was often suppressed by the Western mainstream media in the name of fact-checking, when some of it was later proven to be true. This is also common in news campaigns about anti-Trump, anti-racism, or anti-Brexit in the UK, where the mainstream media choose to suppress some news because they believe that spreading Trump’s message could cause damage to the public. While these media personalities may have the best of intentions, what they may end up causing is the destruction of true freedom of information and the uncovering of the truth. I need you to demonstrate why the mainstream media is biased and why the doctrinaire spirit of the mainstream media, such as the pursuit of objectivity, has instead led to less objective and more biased results. Why we are missing a healthy partisanship today, replaced by toxic partisan bias rh‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‍‍‌‍‍etoric.