Yes, and that alone made Stewart legitimately the most trusted name in news. He even took Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders seriously when MSM was treating them like, as Stewart put it, the "13th Floor In A Hotel."
I'm not going to knock Jon Stewart, he did an excellent job. But he was a comedian who was less of a joke than the rest of the news. That is what our problem is.
I would agree that our gatekeepers have proven themselves untrustworthy, which makes it harder to know much of anything for sure. However, it is plausible that they might have innocently had overlap with their logo and changed it when they found out that they had a pedo symbol for their logo. It's similar to how a building was actually a swastika, but apparently nobody noticed. Hanlon's razor, after all.
It probably doesn't help that she pretty clearly lied about her stance on TPP (among other things), which we have extensive documentation about, thanks to Wikileaks. If they correctly identify Clinton as a horrible human being, it's much easier to get something to stick even without evidence.
The problem is that Jon Stewart was literally the most trusted name in news despite being a comedic take on current events. If that's the best the fourth estate has, of course democracy is going to fail.
And also, the Saudis had a lot more ties to it than we were initially led to believe. That's not a truth that's in any conspiracy theory I'm aware of, but it does mean that the conventional narrative was deeply flawed.
What we need is resources and their distribution, not jobs. Universal Basic Income and a significantly shorter work week would likely be how we stop all the money going to the top and many people being without their basic needs.
It's a bit more complex than that, depending on how the harm effects them. If, for example, a drug caused someone to be unable to work, but only has a negligible effect on life expectancy, they would be taking just as much out (maybe even more if they have more costs) while contributing less. But, your reasoning would say that we should let seniors do speedballs as much as they want.
8th biggest US site (according to Alexa rankings) altering user comments isn't newsworthy? If I'm an investor, I might be concerned that the CEO is trolling in a way that could endanger safe harbor provisions.
And the ideal that BOTH of them could be involved with pedophiles is nuts, right? It's not as if they have spent significant amounts of time together, or that they both belong to the status of elites that can basically get away with murder (somewhat literally in the case of Ted Kennedy). Show me a billionaire or politician that ISN'T a pervert and you've got an actual news story.