I read them. My family and friends tell me it's bad for my health. They're right. I have reasons to read them, and I'm an argumentative sort to begin with and actually draw from that, sharpens how I think to be challenged. I also think that accountability is a two-way street. I'm eager to get feedback -- negative or other -- from any direction, but I'm also happy to give as good as get, and point out when some is being rude or absurd or just flat out wrong.
Yes, it's more challenging than ever, and that's largely because as a culture we've someone created this notion that facts are in the eye of the beholder. It is great for people to take facts and use them to build, support, and defend an opinion. But it's not great when I write a news story, with facts, and have readers, often on Twitter, reject those facts because they don't fit that person opinion. Too often, someone on Twitter will want validation of their opinion even when facts prove that opinion to be colossally wrong or wrongheaded. And so that person will dismiss the facts or the person provided them. That is incredible frustrating.
Plus, we as the media need to do a better job giving the consumer a guide on the differences between a beat writer, a columnist, a paper of record, and show how some reporters on Twitter will be fired if they're wrong and others will be rewarded for likes and popularity, whether they right or wrong because their job is different. We're not all playing by the same rules or same expectations on the same medium, and I can completely understand how that's confusing for readers.
Which is also why I engage, so that when possible I can explain that and hope, hope, hope, it helps.
But, again, sometimes it's a fact some people don't want to hear.