A lot of it has to do with the agenda and who are the "stake holders."
Hell, even Klaus Schwab is pushing this thing, called, "stake holder capitalism." Which, in essence means, the rich and the powerful will rule, and the poor and powerless won't have a say in their destiny. Who has a stake in making a police state, controlling all the levers of power, making the narrative, and seizing all the resources?
SO? What it boils down to, is media that is funded by billionaire foundations, or the billion dollar interlocking global corporate advertisements, or ad. revenue sponsored from grants given by governments, all have a stake in certain types of propaganda. Hell, I hear the same exact government promos on my conservative talk radio station, as I do on my NPR station these day. .. it doesn't bode well for getting the truth, it really doesn't.
Most of the media that is independent of those influences? Is going to be largely "populist," in nature, meaning, directly funded by ONLY by small nickle and dime contributions made directly from the public. The upshot of that? If a production isn't truthful media, if it isn't telling the public FACTS, and lack of spin, to which we can accurately live our lives on? These sources and folks making it just won't get paid.
The little folks can't afford to spend their money on crap.
As Rockefeller himself once was famous for saying. . .
IMO, this is why, more and more, both government and big tech, are trying to censor that, which they cannot control.