print journalism and what passes for articles on the internet are very different things. Our family had a subscription to the magazine for generations. Great stories by actual journalists and amazing photos from people who traveled the globe to catch them. I don't see a lot of archive.is links here leading to websites where globetrotting journalists are capturing the imagination of millions of people. I see a lot of badly edited articles about tweets though. Not that everything behind an archive.is link is trash, but it is very very different.

It seems like a lot of quality paper publications wanted to get into the whole online thing and the quality didn't survive the transition. Maybe because the medium doesn't allow for it. People don't interact with websites the same way. Maybe low effort content made enough ad money that companies just shifted their attention there instead.