Here’s the problem with the journalism industry:

They love to write about scandals and problems. But if you have an actual solution to the problem, they aren’t going to publish it.

You can also see articles on court cases about some scandalous things, but can hardly find out how the case eventually turned out. And so on.

Journalism highlights problems not solutions because that’s what gets the most “outrage reshares”. The exception is some “cool new technology” that can have a story about it, but not as a SOLUTION associated to a lot of PROBLEM stories.

> They love to write about scandals and problems.

They particularly love to write about scandals and problems among their rivals. That's the real change here: journalists and bloggers have gone from thinking of Facebook (and other social media) as potential allies to thinking of them as rivals. Negativity sells, as you say, but negativity that reinforces one's view of rivals as evil is especially appealing. People whose own Google Ads revenue is declining because the eyeballs are elsewhere are very highly motivated, both consciously and unconsciously, to write about why those eyeballs are elsewhere when they clearly shouldn't be.

I think the problem is market economy. Media organizations are businesses which are organisms that focus on the bottom line. I.e. making as much money as possible. Usually the only way to fix these market failures ( I consider this dissonance between monetray value and actual long term value to be a market failure) is with formal regulations or non formal moral regulation. The former is tricky and the latter is requires cohesive cultural values and structures. Sadly (imo) the most effective coltural structures are religious.