This seems like a straw-man. The stories are much more complex than this (in my experience/opinion), usually directly reporting about immoral acts by peers, lack of support, unfair/inequal treatment, hypocrisy, and so on. The event of the failed reproduction is at best an intermezzo.

Not to mention that we know a lot of overhyped results did fail replication and then powerful figures in academia did their best to pretend that still their thrones were not placed on top of sandcastles.

The problem is the negative feedback cycle: someone who has spent decades in academia and is highly published, almost by definition alone, has not experienced the pains of industry practitioners.

Their findings are often irrelevant to industry at best and contradictory at worst.

Of course I'm talking almost solely about SE.