Indeed, many people argue that it has never really existed other than as an idealized fantasy. Journalists have always been beholden to corporate interests, subject to government suasion, and besotted with the pursuit of celebrity. The internet is the latest of a long line of "journalism killers" including radio, film, and television, each decried in their time.
To me, the decline of serious journalism is not caused so much by the internet itself, but rather the decline of interest in serious journalism. The citizen consumer of today just doesn't care. Investigative work is met with public and official apathy unless it involves a small number of hot buttons in the American psyche, namely sex and taxes. Dishonesty, chicanery, and malfeasance by government and corporate leaders are generally ignored or accepted by the public, so why expend the effort?
Most people cannot or will not admit to being apathetic, but the numbers don't lie: in an era of historically low approval ratings for Congress, the vast majority are still re-elected to office. Wall Street is still playing their brazen stock scams. Infomercials guide more purchases than do the test results of Consumer Reports.
Update [5pm EDT]: After a quick browse through the other comments, I rest my case.
Not all is lost. There are still people who pay extravagantly for information as opposed to generic news. It may not be a path to celebrity and adoration by millions, but it does put food on the table.
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
