> The problem is that good journalism doesn't have funding.

The BBC and Reuters can be posited as counterexamples to your assertion. They’re good journalists and well-funded (and not primarily by advertising either).

Hmm... but do you think that they would produce such an article, funding the research into it?

From what I can tell, they would report accurately once these findings were published but would not find a researcher to dig into the claims before publishing that someone (named) said that these chips are at fault.

BBC is under constant threat of getting defunded, it's almost a meme at this point, and on top of that is generally under constant attack. Reuters doesn't do much local or regional stuff.

Which firm's journalist was it that just got arrested at a press conference for asking questions about Israel?