Being poorly written is one thing but the other thing is these "outlets" don't have the same ethical requirements, they don't have the Associated Press or Alabama Press Association to answer to when they do something unethical (and it happens a lot). Attacking people personally, making accusations that have zero proof, etc.
That simply can't be painted with such a broad brush, Josh. These outlets don't have the same ethical requirements as whom? We're in the midst of seeing the largest news organizations do the same thing, "attacking people personally" and "making accusations that have zero proof."
Technological advances certainly are a driving factor in moving from print to digital. For some, it's much easier to read from a device versus the daily print and that's not exclusive to news productions.
On a slightly different note, I was reading over some research at work last night tracking trends in the media that, coincidentally, fall along the same timelines as the decline in subscriptions, et. al. It tracked spikes from major media sources in terminology used in articles; political correctness, social justice, diversity training, and a few others. Call it coincidence if you will, but the spikes occurred dramatically under the last presidential regime. (In other words, the spikes predated the Trump for President run.) A question was posed, "Is the trend the result of media implosion? Or did media implode because it indiscriminately aped the fads that were spawning in the Universities in the 90s and lost all credibility?." As one who studies trends in print and digital publications the results of one can't be viewed without taking the other into consideration.
Personally, I hold the opinion that this started in the '90's and was a result of what was being taught in journalism schools. I can attest to that personally through my time spent in RP. There were a few professors with whom I didn't agree with their teaching styles. They were blatantly encouraging students in school for journalism to create news, create agendas, and shape cultural thought instead of reporting the news.
(FWIW, the research was done using the LexisNexis database and I'm assuming you understand how tricky that can be with key words, the use of quotations, etc. Which, inevitably, leads to confirmation bias quite a lot.)