As usual, you prove yourself to be one of the more insightful media writers around today.
The one thing that gives me pause is the last graph: “If you have the tools and resources and platforms with which to craft your own message and tell your own story, you’re much less likely to look favorably on the traditional media’s ability to do that for you. That goes as much for Amazon responding to the New York Times on Medium about major feature on the company as it does for the demonstrators at the University of Missouri. And that’s a painful lesson the mainstream media are going to have to swallow sooner or later.”
To play devil’s advocate (although I imagine you’d agree with me). That isn’t ALL gravy. It’s good that movements and organizations have power to control their own messaging. But I don’t think that should go unquestioned or unchallenged. I suspect most organizations would agree with me when talking about OTHER organizations.
If, for example, this had been some kind of conservative student’s movement that had just ousted a progressive professor (or installed a conservative president) and they were doing a victory rally and refused to let the press in — I have a feeling people wouldn’t sit well with that. They would want the press there to take note of what is said, how they react to the victory, what their agenda is next, etc.
All organizations deserve to have an outside presence look in at them and ask questions. In the end, it makes them stronger.