Journalism will have to go back to trusting individual creators. If Joe Bloggs signs an image then at least I know Joe Bloggs asserts that image was correct. If that's a trustworthy person (someone I find trustworthy), that's one way.
Of course how well that scales is another matter, but if Joe Bloggs loses my trust then I remove him from my "trusted sources" list.
The chain of integrity will be there, defined by more than just a byline. I may trust say Steve Rosenburg to tell me the truth if he posts a picture of something in Moscow, but if he misleads me then he loses that trust.
Ultimately it's of no difference to trusting what someone writes or says. I might trust a story with a byline on www.cnn.com, that's one thing. I won't however trust a screen capture of something implying it was shown on CNN.
Of course the main stream view for the last 15 years is to believe that journalists are always lying to you and always wrong, which is fine, you just have to accept that if you want to "do your own research" on say what's happening in Turkey with the election, you need to go to Turkey, spend a few years there getting to know and trust many different sources with many different world views.
