I don't know about that, however I do think that the media focus too much on unimportant "feel-good" or "slacktivism" content, and not enough on the things that really matter. Mass media is the way that the majority of the population learn about current affairs. One might almost say that they have a responsibility to report on important current affairs, controversies etc. But they know they'll get more views/shares/likes if they post articles about the latest viral sensation instead of about (for example) the latest developments regarding the Trans-Pacific Partnership. More views means more ad revenue, etc. Capitalism at its finest.

And to a degree, I think that sites like Snapzu, Reddit, Imgur etc can be similar. Users will tend to post the things that they know will get upvoted, and right now that's Cecil. And even if someone does post the important articles, it will be buried to a degree under the other content. Those who are looking for that content will find it and discuss it, but it won't necessarily achieve the exposure that its importance deserves (in the eyes of the person posting it).

And what if a traditional media outlet does decide to exert editorial control and write about matters like the TPP or other world events on their front page? Suddenly they're "using their platform to push an agenda". Sites know they can't win, so they choose not to play and they tend to post banal, lowest-denominator articles that keep their viewers happy.

Maybe I'm being a little extreme with my examples here, but the point I'm trying to make is that I don't think the media are deliberately trying to hide "something more important" from us. They just know that their readers/viewers are going to be more interested in Cecil than the "more important" story.