Not a bad description otherwise.
I would ask of the possibility that the "news" was destined to be this way and was just waiting for the technology to catch up.
"Quality" news was an artificial construct imposed upon the world by a combination of elites and technological lag.
In the case of elites, our news content has been driven by and for educated elites who decided upon what news was important (international affairs, business, etc.) rather than letting the free market decide (real housewives, american idol). Technology allowed more sources of information and started the ratings fueled race to the bottom. I submit that the masses always resented the elitist, balanced news and were just waiting for camera phone driven news the whole time.
As far as technology goes. When I was a kid, there were three networks. The top shows were serious dramatic performances. People got thrown off the air for saying "water closet". This kind of thing was only possible because the technology did not yet exist to provide alternatives. The number of media outlets has grown by about a a billion percent in my lifetime. Science fiction writers in the 40s and 50s saw it coming. Hell, HG Wells saw it coming.