The Revoulution Will Not Be Printed!

I gotta side with Jarvis on this one.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-jarvis/to-newspaper-moguls-you-b_b_184309.html
The papers have had plenty of time to adapt to the readers, they are now forgetting that the customer IS always right. Once they started giving news away for free of course we we're not going to suddenly start paying for it?! NPR understands this well and those of us that listen have to roll our eyes every time pledge season comes around(ungrateful bastards that we are). When we ever did contribute we got to feel like we were in that elite but anonymous crowd. News papers have always been a status symbol. Does the loss of the paper shake up the status quo? You bet! Are they going to piss & whine & moan? You bet!
We need freedom of the press, but the news itself can not be free(that would be a gross misinterpretation of the Freedom of Infrmation Act). The only free news is propaganda. Obviously a government bailout for the papers is a conflict of interest... The problem is Democracy can only work with a well informed public and for the information to be good the journalists that provide it must paid. Surfing the news online is a better mechanism to consume the news; it almost forces me to find multiple perspectives of an event and not second geuss that my one paper is'nt leaving anything out. The medium inherantly lends itself to the forming ones own opinion based on the considering as many sides of the story as available.
We can only hope (& by we I mean those of us going into the field of journalism) that as consumers become more media savy they also become more more media literate. Jon Steward should be given a medal for work hes done to this end. A media literate auduiance is not going to be satisfied with lack of content in their news. Now the faith I'm putting in the public to become active news seekers probaly makes me an idealist. Then again, what revoulution diddnt was never based on the people putting their trust behind a movement?