And indeed, technology is not depopulating journalism - employers are. The decline of journalism as a social institution has indeed started in the 1970s - when TV became a mass medium. The decline in TV news viewership (with an average viewer age of around 55 years) has set in for quite some time now, too. Link that to the rather stable (or: defensive, depending on your position in the debate) culture within news organizations and the rise of labor-saving technologies (anything from CMS systems, digital printing to handheld cameras and hyperlocalization websites), we have a nice three-pronged (Economy, Culture, and Technology) historical explanation for the End of Journalism.

But of course, journalism is not dead. In fact, the opportunities for great storytelling, in-depth reporting, accountability and social responsibility in giving a voice to the voiceless are tremendous. Specific examples aside, generally speaking there is little systematic evidence that professional reporting is becoming deeper, more substantive, well-informed and comprehensive.

So either dystopian or utopian narratives about new media, Web 2.0 or any other techno-fetishism will help us to understand what is going on and how we may help journalism.

I guess my point would be, that any analysis of the current trends and developments needs to consider what people are actually doing. Then we may conclude owners are letting go of reporters and editors left and right while also switching significant parts of the production pipeline to “citizen journalists”. We also see how in some stories the collaboration between some journalists and some citizens brings about real change and adds value. Both models are true. What is actually happening is that the vast majority of journalism graduates finds a job. Also true: those jobs often come without any kind of benefits, are temporary, and do not carry an obligation for the employer to invest in the new employee’s career or future.

I could go on. The point, again, is: the instant someone’s praising the internet for all its wonders in journalism, I also want to see its dark side. The moment someone attacks owners and publishers for their exploitation of workers, someone also has to articulate how in-depth reporting or good working conditions can be found in companies large and small, corporate and non-profit.

So read my lengthy posts (including this one) as the other side of the same story. Reality cannot be but inbetween, complex, messy, and necessarily paradoxical. I think the best way to prepare media producers for their future work is to help them focus on their own individual talent and passion, and to understand the often exploitative, sometimes backwards-looking, distinctly global, excitingly creative yet also factory-like repetition of the contemporary labor environment in the media.

Of course, that said: young people are not returning to the news - not in the way it is packaged and produced these days. But that, I agree, is a different story, one that has little to do with technology.