Why was this reality that Shirky shares with his readers once considered unthinkable? It’s common sense that the scenario of keeping information secure from the expansiveness of the web is not a viable option. People want instantaneous, free information at their disposal. It’s funny to think that the news industry a decade ago didn’t see this scenario coming at them at full speed. I completely agree with Shirky when he says that there is nothing the publishing industry can do to reverse what has already been unleashed on the internet; they can use micropayments, but not without harming their readership.

Shirky is quite pessimistic about the old press institutions. “When someone demands to know how we are going to replace newspapers, they are really demanding to be told that we are not living through a revolution. They are demanding to be told that old systems won’t break before new systems are in place. They are demanding to be told that ancient social bargains aren’t in peril, that core institutions will be spared, that new methods of spreading information will improve previous practice rather than upending it. They are demanding to be lied to.” I’m not sure if newspapers will ever make a comeback, but I don’t think that they will completely drop off the face of the Earth. They’ll never be able to recover or replace what they have already done with completely free access on the internet – maybe we do need to start focusing on saving journalism and less on the demise of newspapers.