Click me. Click me. Click me.

Onions are good eating. Not a bad read, either. And when that sort of layered, tear-inducing writing starts getting quoted and cited like a serious source, that does indicate a problem in the readership. However, why would someone turn from writers with journalism degrees to some social media hacker who's more interested in clickbait and raising Cain, and whose writing has a distinct lack of spellcheck? It's one thing for a dead comedian to question (and more than likely mock) his audience's intelligence and political leanings and stick-people window decals. It's quite another for big-name news outlets to do the same thing. (Somebody mad that I used the write-in blank, or did I nip too hard at a tentacle? I'd apologize, but that sort of thing's a literal joke right now.) Have things have gotten bad enough that the media has started listening to those of their colleagues who have called for a reexamination of their field long before I said anything? Let me rephrase that in the form of a statement - the media's problem with credibility has existed long before I said anything about it. Try addressing the problems your own colleagues have pointed out before you blame the readership. I did overlook something earlier - if a girl can't get out with a nursing degree, dressing up with big-name purses to snag a ride out is apparently a viable retirement option. My mistake. (Chillier, this hemisphere, isn't it?)