Reuters is mostly a propaganda agency these days and therefore doesn't need good photojournalist who still might have an iota of integrity. They prefer one sided reports best made by one side of a civil war or political party. Knowledge, moral and integrity in these days are a hindrance to business and that's what reuters is.
Yes. But the root cause is the acceptance by the public of lower quality work.
The public may have little choice in the matter. Isn't it the classic case of the producer tail wagging the consumer dog. The producers( paymasters) of photographs decides that a better standard isn't needed for Mr Average who quickly becomes used to a lower standard.