MURDOCH EMPIRE AT RISK: Howard Kurtz adds his voice to the chorus of columnists heralding massive damage to the Murdoch brand of media.

RETURN TO THE COFFEE HOUSE: The Economist speculates on the future of news and media, comparing the internet culture of news-sharing to early coffee houses where news would be both consumed and discussed. "The internet lets people read newspapers or watch television channels from around the world: the Guardian, a British newspaper, now has more online readers abroad than at home. The web has allowed new providers of news, from individual bloggers to sites such as the Huffington Post, to rise to prominence in a very short space of time. And it has made possible entirely new approaches to journalism, such as that practised by WikiLeaks, which provides an anonymous way for whistleblowers to publish documents. The news agenda is no longer controlled by a few press barons and state outlets, like the BBC."

Although I agree that the shape of news distribution has changed dramatically, in it seems everyone's a curator of news these days, I doubt that the content being consumed has changed to quite the same degree. The same people, it would seem to me, still do the reporting. Organisations like the Associated Press and the New York Times continue to set the overall agenda; the news they produce is the news we aggregate. It's changing, yes, and it's better. But let's not get carried away.

HOW THE TABLOIDS KEPT POLITICIANS PLIANT: The New York Times examines the role of The News of the World and other tabloids in the lives of politicians. Although not necessarily giving credit to the newspapers in question, the Times reporter seems to take the view that such journalism is, although ugly, important.