“These are all correct but basically assume readers are stupid and newspaper people are the only ones who “get” the world.”

You omit the part where the designer Blankmen rushed forward in their capes to say THEY are the ones who TRULY get it, and then they made promises but failed to deliver on any of them. In the process, newsrooms were dumbed down, and credibility was destroyed.

“What iTunes did for musicians by allowing anyone to enter the stage to make money, the web has done for journalism.”

That happened, though, because of court rulings destroying the free model. That hasn’t happened yet in the journalism world.

What would have helped and what still needs to happen is to have strict licensing/credentialing of journalists. This idea usually brings out the whiners who claim this violates the First Amendment, but that’s crazy. The government doesn’t have to do the licensing. Also, as I say on other site, the Bill of Rights does not mean unregulated freedoms. Felons cannot vote or purchase firearms legally. Free speech does not permit someone to yell “Fire!” in a crowded room. Even churches are regulated in some ways, but that doesn’t eliminate freedom of religion.

“Oddly, journalists think there is “The Answer” to fixing or saving news and newspapers and any experiment that failed in one place should never be repeated somewhere else.”

Gee, that’s funny. The design-based approach has failed almost everywhere, yet people cling to it like it’s free bread.