Actually this article does more to make professional journalism look bad than citizen journalism. No one proposes that citizen journalism = reading the raw fee

Actually this article does more to make professional journalism look bad than citizen journalism. No one proposes that citizen journalism = reading the raw feed of info from individuals. Citizen journalism = raw feed + filters and aggregators. Either Carr doesn't understand that, which makes him look dumb, or he does and is pretending not to in order to generate controversy on what would otherwise be a slow news day, which makes him look dishonest. Either way, his example contradicts his implicit claim that professional journalism is better. If I had to guess, I'd bet on the latter: that this is a deliberate attempt to manufacture controversy to generate page views. And since this is a fluff post, I'm going to kill it. See, the new model doesn't work so badly after all.