Are amateurs stupid?

Could Andrew Keen's argument that we are facing the laws of digital Darwinism in Cult of the Amateur be true? Not many think so, but as Tom Davenport posts, Keen might be at least partially right.

The Project for Excellence in Journalism study found that user-driven journalism focused on what Tom calls more 'quotidian' topics.

The report finds: "Many of the stories users selected did not appear anywhere among the top stories in the mainstream media coverage studied. And there was often little in the way of follow-up. Most stories on the user-news sites appeared only once, never to be repeated again".

As a consultant, I appreciate Tom's non-divisive conclusion: "I don’t think that much can be done about this situation, other than to write about it and hope to persuade individuals to return to traditional journalistic sources in addition to user-driven ones."

Chin up Andrew!