My problem with pieces like this is that they always start from the position that journalists are 'just doing their job' but rarely entertain the idea that just maybe that that job needs major reform. The onus is always on the audience to change. https://twitter.com/callapilla/status/1312154316120100865

This piece gives voice to journalists, but none of the thoughtful critics who also comment thru SM. It complains about the 'middle dropping out' of debate (quoting C. Bennett) but gives no voice to that very middle, highlighting only the worst abuse.
It fails on its own terms.

As I've said before, the issue is not the Andrews press conferences per se; they provide a focal point for concerns people have had with the media over many years now. To highlight responses to them is to live in an eternal present and to ignore many years of context.

You can go on writing pieces like this very forever, highlighting the unforgivable abuse that no doubt comes the way of certain journalists. No-one denies that happens. But articles like this fail to adequately acknowledge genuine criticism that also come through social media.

Just to finish, it seems to me that someone like @oz_f (quoted in the piece) is doing fantastic work in holding the Andrews govt to account, but that is not true of every journalist in the room.

We all know certain media orgs have an agenda beyond 'just doing their job' that colours their coverage. People feel powerless against this, and so yell on social media. Not excusing the abuse (I've had my share of it over the yrs) but you have to acknowledge the power imbalance.

Maybe if the media itself, in such an article, acknowledged that power imbalance & made space for other voices, things would improve.
As I said, media don't get to complain about the middle dropping out of debate, when they focus most of their own attention on the extremes.