This chart (https://twitter.com/benthompson/status/778260618914652164) suggests that Facebook should not a lone scapegoat for journalism's decline - the internet as a whole is a more reasonable target.
Actually it was Craigslist. Back before the internet, the single biggest pot of newspaper revenue was classified ads.
Any manifestation of the Internet makes that obsolete - but the specific method of obsoletion may be different by country.
Then again the decline of journalism is not a matter of internet as much than a matter of selling out to advertisers and being bought by rich individuals or corporations. With internet access becoming popular it provided an alternative to the traditional media to get news and information.
Can you expand on that? I see the decline in circulation and eroding of their ad and classified income as the principal culprit. I haven't seen any prominent examples of newspapers where the rich individuals or corporations have caused a decline. The Washington Post was thriving during the 40 years that Buffett had an ownership stake.
Yes, Facebook is how many people use the Internet - but it's a mistake to therefore conclude Facebook is responsible for journalism's decline.