That seems plausible, but there have been lots of news stories where every major outlet published an absurd sensationalist story which was objectively refuted by the story's own sources. Even here on HN years later people subscribe to (and will die on the hill for) the trivially debunked sensationalist interpretation. Two examples that come to mind are the [Covington Catholic fiasco][0] and the [Google "Diversity Screed" memo][1].

Besides, it's my perception that the news has become more sensational, and I certainly don't think it's accurate to say that the jobs of fact checkers have become more difficult (except in the sense that their superiors hamper them in some manner on account of the profitability of sensationalism, which is essentially my point).

I personally think there's some merit in the notion that we live in a post-truth world. Both the media and the POTUS feel comfortable lying quite overtly as though they understand that the value of credibility is at an all-time low. Academics in critical theory fields deride objectivity as fundamentally racist and talk about "other ways of knowing". Maybe I'm wrong, but it feels like there's a sea-change in our values, especially as they relate to truth and integrity.

[0]: https://reason.com/2019/01/20/covington-catholic-nathan-phil... [1]: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/08/the-mos...