Editors aren't also professionals who work with the journalists? What you're advocating for is a lot of amateur voices with limited resources in comparison and a plethora of personal agendas. It's more democratic than having a few professional curators. But is that better?

Its varied. That's the point.

Right. So, professional journalists with experience, and who are anything but anonymous.

Except when they are, like with the Economist.

Anyway, they're single voices, not a variety. So bubble.