no, not at all...
but. been thinking.
if news orgs migrate completely online, and online means staffs reduce to some 12 percent of normal, then I'm thinking there are three quick alternatives:
1. reduced amount of news (pardon again: content)
2. rely on pro-am reporting
3. employ a ****load of freelance journalists (many of them newly unemployed) who know how to do the job and why it matters, and who are willing to do it for peanuts. why they would, i do not know. but more power to them. and the purpose might survive.
it's the 12 percent that's the killer. would love to see comments. but as those of us out here in blogo-land know (at least if our stat counters are cranking accurately), no one reads this stuff on weekends. :) bk