I think you and I agree on everything but one small point. The degree
of relevance traditional media still has. To be clear, I don't think
you and I differ on how important journalism is, just how much of that
is left in today's media corporations.

As far as Huff and Drudge…Way overhyped. Take a look at the lead story right now on Huff. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/05/obama-...

What is it? Embedded video from CNN & MSNBC and a link to an AP story. That is 90% of the content on Huff.

Drudge? Yes an occasional breaking news item but more often than not it is what is today. Links to the Gainesville Sun, to the WSJ, to the Washington Post.

Well there be a lot of newspapers and magazines that go under? You bet and I have no problem with that really. Those that can adapt and find business models to reward journalism will survive. Huff and Drudge better hope that is the case.

The “what's on the other side” comment is in regard to those who may try and close off their walls. I think that Rupert is leading the media down a self destructive path that only a very few sites will survive, like Murdoch's own WSJ (I count the New Yorker in that crowd too). And what's worse is I think he knows that.

I get your point, but are you really telling me that bloggers don't break news? Because they've been doing it for as long as there have been blogs. In fact the rise of blogging was directly fueled by the fact that bloggers consistently scooped the media or the media flat out wouldn't cover certain stories because of the fear of retribution from advertisers.

You want examples? Drudge and Huffington Post. And just because they've gained mainstream acceptance doesn't remove them from the blogger crowd.

My main point is that if the bulk of main stream media takes their content and puts it behind a wall you will see a rise in blogger/citizen journalism that will eclipse anything that's happened up until now.

” Why did we want to see what’s on the other side again? I forgot why you mattered.”

The majority of news is still reported and discovered by the “mainstream”, I just don't think its in the space you are following. Point me to a single blogger who breaks news like ESPN does. Help me find one tweet that delivers news on human rights like this New Yorker article does; http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/03/30/0...

The fact that these organizations are working well digitally does not remove them from the “media, news guys”. Media and news guys are relevant and they absolutely do matter. Are certain parties in that group taking the wrong approach? Absolutely as well. Does that make the whole group irrelevant? No.