I was struck by the same feeling, that this piece was a gripping read on what was already a gripping story to tell. His "brain was oozing out" was a point I stopped and read again. What changed the style of reporting I wonder?
"This evening at about 9:30 p.m. at Ford’s Theatre, the President, while sitting in his private box with Mrs. Lincoln, Mrs. Harris and Major Rathburn, was shot by an assassin, who suddenly entered the box and approached behind the President. "The assassin then leaped upon the stage, brandishing a large dagger or knife, and made his escape in the rear of the theatre. "The pistol ball entered the back of the President’s head and penetrated nearly through the head. The wound is mortal."
http://www.poynter.org/news/media-innovation/12755/birth-of-...
The technological driver wasn't the addition of new media but the telegraph, which meant news stories took on a new urgency -- and editors had to make quick cuts to stories close to print time as they decided which stories deserved most column inches.
Will the Internet kill the inverted pyramid approach? There is no longer any cost associated with column inches printed or characters transmitted.