I would agree that it has a lot of serious issues right now, but I would disagree on "toxic".

The free flow of information is incredibly important and has introduced a new age of information for the planet. With small SoC computers becoming more and more regular and fit for purpose of general computing at a phenomenally low price, this brings an incredible swath of information available to the masses in a way that has not been available before in history, and it also gives "experts" a means of communicating their expertise to audiences without the need for traditional publishing routes that existed before. Seriously, this is a really wonderful time to live in, and I hope that development for software on the various SoC's continues so that we can truly be in a world where everyone can access and share information.

The downside to this is that there is now a higher burden on readers to vet their information and to be trained in how to research. Traditional gatekeepers of information (news, text books, etc) no longer have the strength they once had - these mediums aren't irrelevant, but their authority has been completely underminded, and we're in an adjustment period as people learn how to properly research and interpret information. This isn't me being coy and suggesting that a certain interpretation or filtering out specific viewpoints, this is me suggesting that most people don't know the basics of research, like the stuff many of us learned in gradeschool, such as actually read and understand evidence before you make a claim, find opposing viewpoints and research and try to understand how this information affects your understanding of what you currently know, and, perhaps most importantly, how to withold judgement when there isn't enough information to even begin processing what you have been provided.

I am grateful for the immediately published, publicly visible, no barrier to entry, no moderation videos providing me with information on how to plumb a sink, or how to fix a washing machine that doesn't drain, or the numerous science experiments or even just opinion pieces that are presented on various content curating websites. (Youtube, Medium, et. al.,) A lot of it is trash and non-sense that is not congruent with reality , but at least I have the ability to research and determine if it's congruent with reality or not.

I agree - it's very frustrating how much influence spam accounts, people gaming reputation algorithms, and just assholes in general have in the current age of information; relying on algorithms to save us from this is the wrong idea and it's a poor idea. But this is the reality of the world when information flows freely - as a people, we need to learn how to better assess the information we're given and we need to learn how to withold judgement/reactions until information is better vetted, corroborated, and confirmed, and we need to learn healthy skepticism when it comes to the sources of information available to us now. It will take time to adjust, and there are many bad-faith efforts to vet information, with many online sources trying to take on the role of gatekeeper for people and doing so in bad-faith. But the information isn't going to go away, nor are the shysters who use it to further their agendas. Institutions that curate information as well as people who access this information need to get better collectively at interpreting it.