I disagree that we're clearly worse off. For a good explanation on why, this is a pretty good read:
The thesis, for those less interested in buying the book, is that when we embraced blogs like Gawker and Buzzfeed as a source of news content, the quality of our news decreased drastically.
You went from sort of the New York Times subscription-based model, where people are subscribed already and your journalists can focus on the quality of your content, back to the days of "EXTRA! Read all about it," where everyone is just trying to be heard over the thousands of other available blogs.
So our headlines became clickbait, content became lies, and because it's so pervasive, there is little to no accountability.
The hogan case is important because it adds accountability.