Where did journalism go wrong?
The better question is how did it go wrong?
You do not have to look anywhere else but this profile on Ronan Farrow, one of the smattering of people who could be considered the ideal of a journalist. The fact that we had decades of women being abused in the workplace, particularly in the communications industry -- but it took a white man to make the grievance a legitimate one, tells you everything you need to know about how worthless journalism has been all along.
Or, you can look at the dysfunctional mess of the Denver Post, which is an primitive and infantile reaction to a reality that has been a long time coming. Newsweek is also a mess, but the overlords put a clamp on the public tantrums. It isn't changing the situation, but those screaming fits drown out what has been really happening: childish narratives used to distort perceptions of reality.
The problem is perception is not reality, no matter what kind of slap fight you choose to engage in. Had journalism been a healthy industry, it would attract a different sort of ownership.
But the worst of it comes the willful ignorance of that reality that demands our attention, but has been deflected by journalistic narrative.
Take this propaganda piece from the New York Times on the "renegades" of the "dark web." The piece is pure deception: here are Establishment professors and authors voguing for the newspaper. The are not renegades. They are old school and well-heeled academics who formed little online groups to indulge in the café culture of Europe. That is not news.
The same filters are present in a piece from the Conversation about the hypocrisy of Hillary Clinton and Madeleine Albright -- two women who had no trouble having blood on their hands with their Machiavellian and opportunistic political policies -- and their subsequent financial exploitations of those inhuman policies -- but then the author of the piece proves he had learned absolutely nothing of his own lesson as he believes a younger generation are somehow better.
The author -- a professor from my old alma mater who should really know better -- didn't bother reading the words of a young Hillary Clinton to see that she too was once one of those voices who seemed to preach idealism -- and yet it was all calculated dogma proving she was willing to betray those ideals for a better political position. Her own undergraduate thesis screams that we cannot merely take youthful musings for granted, especially when the methods and messages are too close to Clinton's for comfort.
The profession has proven itself unteachable. You can either waste energy trying to resurrect a dead corpse -- or work toward nurturing a new life to create something new.
The misogyny that women's issues are only important if a white man says it is won't do.
The selfish tirades won't do.
The delusional narratives won't do.
The blindness to the past won't do.
So moving on is the more rewarding option -- and the more constructive one...