Yes there are a number of issues with on-line. It could be anyone and building up a trust of the sites/teams logic, bias and opinion needs to be done with caution. The older print magazines have a strong reputation built on a solid economic model which displayed fairness in most cases. When they go online you can still see most of them are running a bit thinner on staff in this modern world (sharing backroom staff?) but solid in their opinion and trustworthy.
The "influencer" based rot on the web that is being peddled as opinion but mostly driven by consumption of freebies needs to have a public health warning on it. A bit like the CERT-15 signs that come up on the front of movies. There should be a "this muppet was given a freebie and has been proven to say anything to get more" on the front. I actually use an advert blocker so most of the garbage gets removed. Where a site detects this and asks me to remove I usually like them as it means they are honest and trying to be fair to their advertisers so I tend to trust them more and pause the ad-blocker. Where I see adverts that are clearly click-bait I tend to just snap read the bit I want and close the page. I have programmed one of the F keys on the keyboard to close the tab to save time! There is a direct relationship between quality of advertising and quality of content in my experience.
I still get Autocarp weekly and enjoy it as a print magazine and normally buy Car, Evo or something with an interesting article on the front cover once a month. I do however read and watch a ton on line when time permits (usually when on dead-as-dish audio/video conferences right now). I do think that the ability to watch some good videos full screen actually does go beyond the print format. I do however draw the line at anything by Schmeeeee150 who makes me want to throw something at the monitor.
