Consider the ad by the Colorado Press Association:
Saying "I don't need newspapers; I get my news from the internet." is the same as saying "I know, right? And I don't need farmers; 'cause I get my food at the supermarket." #newspapersthrive
Never mind that the ad itself was posted on the internet.
What did strike me is that their flawed analogy could actually have some merit if it were corrected.
The internet is exactly the opposite of a supermarket. Supermarkets correspond to the mainstream media, with its' mass production to fit the common denominator, quantity-over-quality product and long chain of financial, legal, and political commitments. The internet, on the other hand, is the WWII-era victory garden.
Victory Gardens were small private or neighborhood farms that kept communities fed, provided some means of social bonding over a shared activity, and minimized people's reliance on easily-disrupted supply chains. Many cities still have public gardening plots to this day.
The internet is our media Victory Garden. It bypasses the easily-compromised flow of information through publishing houses' and newspapers' (((investors and editors))). It provides a huge amount of social bonding through shared activity, as memes, gaming, and general alienation have proven, and the information gained by online sleuthing and boots-on-the-ground citizen reporting provides more information than the mainstream sources ever could.
This is not to say that "I heard it on the internet, so it must be true!", but at least there is a much greater volume of information presented. Furthermore, you will likely be able to find thousands of different viewpoints and bits of conflicting evidence; mainstream sources will usually only offer one or two approved narratives.
The reason for the success of the internet is that it is not dependent upon official reporters to find evidence and draw conclusions for us. We don't need to go to the supermarket when we can grow our own food.