At least the latter manipulative broadcasts have a vetting process to root them in some semblance of reality. Then you can rummage among various ones to see truth hidden in plain sight.

But the fight is for the uncritical consumer who isn't going to look beyond the substance. The web overall also provides a vast amount of information that's useful to those who critically sift it even it is arguably harmful to those who uncritically swallow it.

Moreover, the vetting process is an extra added because of mass media's monopoly position - part of "journalist quality" generally. And this has been declining for a while. Partly 'cause of competition from the web but also because of a generally more competitive environment.

Which is to say, we're not going back to the old situation regardless so we may as well appreciate the benefits and drawbacks of each era.

Like the reality of WMDs in Iraq?

That lie came from Colin Powell and the Bush administration, it wasn't manufactured by the media itself.

The parent comment was about vetting information. Clearly the media didn’t do that WRT the WMDs.

It was as "vetted" as could be at the time. They just reported the government's messaging. And when that turned out to be a lie, they reported this as well.