So the democratization of media broke democracy.
Seriously though — what disappeared is the journalistic process vetting information. However, it should be pointed out that as consumers of media we share a huge part of the blame — that is, we consume what we want. Even in print, a Klan member can still buy only Klan news and stay in their own bubble.
What we’re seeing on the internet is more bubbles and less ability to challenge those ideas. I’d argue this began in the era of 24 hour cable news, as which political viewpoint you have became a competitive advantage. Add talk radio to that, and that came earlier.
The reason why some print news are more respected than others (The NY Times over — say — the NY Post) is due to this sort of vetting and reliability.
Alt-right news, and left-wing sights like HuffPo and Mother Jones have no such vetting.
The great thing about the internet is it easier for those people who could only publish leaflets and pamphlets before to progress their views at a much higher distribution rate than before, whereas print requires some compensation for professional journalistic work. It made free internet news far more ubiquitous than truthful and vetted stories from more respected newspapers.
Much easier to be heard if you’re soapbox can be heard by more people than if you charge admission.