This is not the collaborative journalism we sought, the citizen journalism that we have been so enthusiastic about since the dawn of the net. It is churnalism. It is the appearance of journalism, a bogus activity. [Democracy will die if professional journalists go to the wall]
Currently revising and rewriting a series of posts, and working towards consolidated, extended posts - more on this topic can be found in the post above.
By the way, if you still don't routinely read Greenslade's column, I urge you to do so - there is no greater way to gain a wide insight into all issues concerning the press (with wider media relevance too).
This column reacts to Michael Rosenblum's recent conference speech in which he argues that newspapers will end up stifles, citing the examples of Airbnb (hotels) and Uber (at a $30bn valuation, the world's biggest taxi form doesn't own any cabs!):
In the not too distant future, the world’s biggest and most powerful news and media company will not employ a single journalist.Greendale argues he sidestepped the main issue:
We are, of course, headed in the direction indicated by Rosenblum. The question he does not ask, however, is whether it will be beneficial for journalism and, by extension, beneficial for the public.
The supposed virtue of a journalism of the people by the people for the people is nothing more than a way of publishers maximising profit. Media companies are using the technology as a way of reducing labour costs rather than as a way of democratising, and thereby enhancing, editorial content.tbc