[pyre]

> We've got to stop investing in the childish notion that we can all become bazillionaires by aggregating other people's hard work with a comment thread.

I can't count the number of times that mainstream media has done this same thing. There are plenty of examples of Wikipedia circular references (i.e. Journalist reads unsubstantiated comment on a Wikipedia page, Published comment as truth (without citing Wikipedia, though sometimes with citation), Wikipedia cites the new article as proof of the original comment). What about those articles that are basically a reprinting of some corporate press release, which are passed off as journalism?

[timr]

Do these things happen? Yes, of course.

Do these things happen so frequently that you can use them to argue that journalism is merely an aggregator of content? I think you've got an uphill battle.