The old guard artists back then weren't giving the new kids a break, and they decided to strike it on their own.
The Vienna Secession was part of the wave of Art Nouveau, but they had some interesting ideas.
They wrote manifestos, and decided to create new kinds of art, and went with it full force: from architecture to sculpture to even furniture and jewelry.
It sought to completely transform art.
In a way the movement for a short-lived one, but it was just long enough to help establish a new generation of artists who went on to be successful in other styles, such as Modernism. It served its purpose.
The Internet did no such thing for the profession, even if it should have. Journalism still collapsed, mostly because the Internet exposed the weaknesses of the profession. If the medium is the message, than the Internet's message was simple: journalism isn't working.
What the Internet should have done was transform the profession. It could have improved the product.
Doctors, for instance, have an oath to vow to do no harm. They, like lawyers, real estate agents, teachers, and even hairdressers, have to have a license to operate.
Journalists have neither oaths nor a governing body overlooking their ability to uphold their promises. They produced no manifestos or movements.
It should stand for truth, but time and again, it stands for nothing.
The profession never observed history to improve itself. It never observed art or science to see how to make themselves a better profession. Professional appropriation has its place, and journalism never considered the ways to make themselves stronger.
Had it been a profession of idealism and pragmatism, we would have seen an evolution along with a revolution.
Instead, it chose to stick to a few untested rules as it slowly floundered into nothingness.