I find it interesting that those who can't even define the boundaries of a generational divide or keep to the tenets of their own traditions think they can define anyone else.
Why is there a jump in any group keeping an eye on impeachment proceedings? Because that's the content recommended most in the feeds and aired on the most viewed time slots, and is therefore the most convenient to consume, or is that material sought out? Does seeking out information on other cultures, enjoying their foods, or acknowledging their achievements make one part of those cultures?
Being an outsider means being subject to some of the worst urges of those who seek group cohesion at the expense of the outsider, and when even devices meant to assist in religious observance, in moments meant for peace and solitude, come under attack, there's no such thing as hiding. To someone who's seen the effects of those urges, flattery is fickle, and holding to a pattern of coverage that skews to one side over multiple administrations (why does it feel like I've said this before?) doesn't make up for that inconstancy. It makes the statement "grow a conscience and be oneself" sound like "join our side or be damned," and a lot more difficult to take seriously.
Being an outsider does, however, release a person from the obligation to flatter any side over another. It allows the freedom to point out the mistakes that continue through new technologies and seemingly disparate situations. And finding oneself subject to the whims of others' praise or vilification makes one less inclined to accept either with anything but a heavy dose of sodium chloride.
Those who have lost their own certainty have no claim to anyone else's.
(Addendum: 11/10/19 - Even with the algorithms controlling what shows up in the feed, looks to me like it's a news outlet from outside the country that's more adept at showing articles from opposing sides of the same issue. But that's just one person's perception.)