I've had versions of almost exactly that conversation with friends and family members for going on 10 years now.  It's a tricky problem because the need (with so many channels) for each one to find its profit center drives that behavior.  That might lead you to think that additional regulation would help, but it would certainly be a concern to put the government in charge of interpretation of news (and has been a big problem in countries that do it that way).  I'm not sure what the way out of this is, given that larger numbers of content-carriers on TV and on internet is a thing that is probably here to stay.  

When I first got an internet connection (in 1989!!), I remember saying to a family member that this will greatly democratize the dissemination of information and may lead to the decline of print media.  It would certainly shine a light of information into repressive countries.  And all that has come true.  What I didn't anticipate is how it would provide a platform to amplify what were previously seen as pretty crazy and "fringe" voices.  Even if you search the internet today, you can find a wealth of stuff from Kent DB.  

Is there a point-source solution?  Or do we have to slowly evolve out of this cul de sac in which we find ourselves?  Are we even capable of that?