For your

> So where do you get that kind of analytical journalism then if not in MaiNsTReAm mEDiA?

Part of my discussion was to explain that

"that kind of analytical journalism"

is not available in the MSM. Soooo, can't get such journalism from the MSM. So, get it elsewhere or don't get it at all.

For a little more depth, the MSM has been in business for 100+ years, paper, radio, TV, and now the Internet. My view is that in this time they have found some techniques they believe in. In simple terms, they discovered long ago that they didn't know how to get many readers for

"that kind of analytical journalism".

And the MSM publishers are astoundingly similar in the "techniques" they use. Indeed, when one publisher gets a hot headline, many of the others will copy it, content, terminology, etc.

In particular, for numerical data presented as I outlined, apparently the MSM hates that: (A) They concluded 100 years ago and have not changed their mind since that such numerical data presentations will cause the eyes of their audience to glaze over and the readers to move on. (B) As can suspect in the subject of this thread, presenting the data as I outlined, especially graphed over time, and as already observed in this thread, as is obvious, would make the alarmism of their story disappear. That is, one of the reasons for sloppy, incomplete reporting is that this is an easy way to get what we now call click bait. And one of the main reasons I want the

"that kind of analytical journalism"

is to reduce the amount of click bait.

And, sure, there is the remark that, following what I am asking for, the MSM "would publish monthly" -- extra credit for knowing the source.

That's not true, of course, since there is nearly no end of content to be reported, but, again, the MSM has treasured techniques, e.g.,

If it bleeds, it leads.

I wrote:

> The Internet is permitting new sources including some with some good reporting.

I didn't say the sources exist yet!

Such sources will appeal to fractions of the current MSM audience. Right: I am predicting that the audience will fracture into many small audiences. In a different sense from the MSM audience, this prediction of fracture is an assumption of my startup.

But for your question of where to get

"that kind of analytical journalism"

one source is

http://themusingsofthebigredcar.com/

I suspect that there are more and as time goes on will be many more.

Well, there are more:

(1) YouTube is becoming a single source for essentially all video content. Some of the content is "analytical". There promises to be more content, i.e., there are YouTubers.

(2) There are the math/science sites

https://simonsfoundation.org/category/features/science-news/

https://www.quantamagazine.org/

(3) For space, astronomy, and related physics, there is

http://www.universetoday.com/

Uh, it is easy to notice reports of financial problems at CNN, WaPo, and the NYT. Since these are all ad supported, the problems are audience problems -- audience too small. Soooo, the MSM is changing, maybe just slowly going out of business.

A lot of the content creators and publishers I've mentioned are essentially one person efforts. This means that, with the fraction I mentioned, the MSM is facing some severe pressure on cost of doing business.