Actually, no. The article misses one important step, namely experts or interpretation of data. Meaning, there's data, data reporting, aggregation and selection,

Actually, no. The article misses one important step, namely experts or interpretation of data. Meaning, there's data, data reporting, aggregation and selection, and finally, interpretation. Journalism is then another step, namely a transmission system from the realm of data and specific domain to common understanding. The form of this is the story, which integrates the findings with public matters (by this constructing meaning) and allows the public to form an opinion. Accepted opinion eventually becomes the narration that leads our accorded actions. – What "data journalism" means here, is omitting expert opinion and directly applying common understanding to unstructured data, by this neglecting any need for expert domain or domain experts, in other words, skipping informed opinion, since the expertise is already "in the stack" – and even more so, requiring the members of the public to come up with the story on their own (and fight it out). I'm not convinced.