For hundreds of years, citizens have relied on the press to inform the general public, a function vital to a successful democracy This responsibility has always placed a staggeringly large amount of power in the hands of a small group of journalists and editors. Despite their efforts to maintain journalistic integrity and present objective information, the viewpoints of these individuals are often expressed to the exclusion of minority or other differing perspectives. Recently, the flourishing of digital communication technologies has allowed participants in social networks to act as citizen journalists, providing the public with a broader set of viewpoints. The rise of digital communications has fundamentally undermined the influence of traditional media sources by decentralizing the production of information and placing that power into the hands of the masses.

As the mainstream media, generally defined as newspaper, radio, television journalism, developed throughout the twentieth century, it was shaped by the values of contemporary American culture. Broadcasting programs on the radio was the mass production of information, which rose to prominence in the early 1900s and was greatly influenced by the ideal of uniformity. As radio shows aired, the listening public gathered together in groups and listened to the same information presented at the same time, just as groups nationwide did. The transition to television broadcasts was similarly based on the ideas of progress and uniformity. Indeed, broadcast media of these types only allows the mass audience two options, "to receive or reject what it is offered" (Blumler). Modern digital production and distribution networks are the product of a completely different set of values: individuality and speed. Despite hundreds of channels of programming on television, "in households with on-line access, fewer hours are spent watching television," for individual wants are more easily addressed online (Rodriguez). The concept driving the Twitter phenomenon is instructive: a global collection of users create and distribute information to interested parties instantaneously. Then, a large community decides what information is important, rather than a singular editor. The real-time, user-created ecosystem created through the use of digital networks is vastly different from any prior form of media.

The newspaper industry's reactions to the internet revolution are indicative of traditional media's lack of understanding of society's new values. In 1996, as the web was still in its infancy, journalists saw its impact as mere "business as usual with bigger computers" (Rodriguez). Even as some bloggers and other citizen journalists rose to national and international significance, members of the traditional media offhandedly dismissed them as "not 'legitimate' journalists" (Cooper). Even today, in a world where web-only news sources such as The Huffington Post have posed questions for the President of the United States himself (Luscombe), most newspapers continue to see themselves on a higher plane because of their historical role. From this lofty position, newspapers continue targeting an aging demographic with their rapidly obsolescing product (Ahlers).

Regardless of the media's contention that online content is inferior and unreliable, the public embraced new digital technologies which better matched their values. Classified ads, traditionally comprising 30% of a newspaper's income, were quickly replaced with online equivalents, diverting profits towards new media. Online advertising became a far less expensive method for reaching consumers, causing many advertisers to take their business elsewhere. With their sources of income crumbling around them, traditional media outlets could not even fall back on consumers to save them, for their readers increasingly turned to free, online sources for news (Gunther). In an effort to counteract these losses, papers across the nation realized the pressing need to diversify onto the internet. However, their motives were primarily financial; moving to the web did not change their core business or assumptions about society's values.

Central to the democratic and individualist spirit of the internet is the idea that popular interaction develops better information. The traditional media, despite their slow steps into interactivity, continued using their traditional method with the power of information production residing solely in the hands of the media elite. Meanwhile, people expected more from their web services than news services provided. Full interactivity in the production and consumption of information is the principal goal of popular sites like Twitter or Wikipedia. In the early days of the web, analysts warned that if the media began to let down its standards, it would "degenerate to the level of the tabloid shows" and become completely irrelevant (Rodriguez). Unable to atract attention through individual expression, a desperate media turned to speed. As the push for immediacy in media was heightened to frenzied levels sources traded editorial and journalistic quality for the capacity to report a story first. Many sources neglected their "responsibility to separate truth from rumor" (Lasica). Indeed, the quality of reporting has decreased while the use of attention-grabbing gimmicks has increased. During the coverage of Hurricane Katrina's aftermath, for instance, the media continuously hyped their supposedly excellent coverage and hard-hitting stories, while all the while reporting obviously fabricated rumors as fact (Goldberg). In the push to be more relevant in a digital marketplace, old media has lost both its credibility and direction.

The decades-old institution of the media is crumbling. What once were pillars of knowledge are now just circuses for ratings and advertising dollars. Web journals which were once discredited as trivial postings are now being raised to greater prominence in the national and international arenas. However, even with the expansion of knowledge beyond traditional technologies, there is still "a market demand for quality journalism and reporting" as long as the information is relevant (Lieberman). Digital communications arose from a new culture with new values and new means of interacting with information. If the media cannot merge both their traditional quality with modern-day relevance and participation, it will find itself powerless at the hands of a newly empowered digital society.