Are editors necessary? Of course Carroll, being a former editor of one of the most respected papers in America, supports the role of editor, but he ignores how that role is changing. 

Carroll points out that when editorial decisions are left to the public, as is now possible with algorithms "tabulating the collective wisdom of online readers," publications can quickly become tabloid-driven, as with what happened last year with the most popular story in a Seattle paper having nothing at all to do with hard news. He asks if the role of the newspaper is to lead or follow; lead by telling the public the "significant things they don't already know," or follow and risk becoming the voicepiece of a public obsessed with celebrities and entertaining news.  

Traditional editors of which Carroll speaks are not dead. They are still needed to guide reporters, shape stories and to decide where resources should be allocated. But the fact is, a lot of information that would never reach public eyes because of the editor's role of "gatekeeper" now will thanks to the universal publishing power of the Internet.  

Because news is everywhere and can now be published anywhere for the whole world to read, editors need to scour the plethora of information on the Web and pick out the best for their readers. Relationships of trust will be established directly between editors and their audience; the audience will trust editors to give it the information it seeks not just from their own publications but from all publications throughout the world.

In this sense, editors are even more necessary than ever. They just have to realize their job description is changing.

Turning over rocks: Carroll answers the question, "If newspapers disappear, should the public care." Obviously his answer is yes, and for good reason; he figures through educated estimates that at least 80% of the original reporting done in American comes from newspapers.

He tells the story back when he was just starting out as a reporter of continually contacting a source even though nothing was coming of it until finally he received a worthy tip which resulted in an important story. The problem with "turning over rocks" today is that it is very costly, something that newspaper shareholders don't want to hear.

However, Carroll does overlook one important aspect of how the relationship between reporters and tipsters is changing. Whereas whistleblowers used to contact reporters from legitimate publications because they were the only source of getting news out to the public, today, anyone can publish news online and still keep their anonymity.

This has not yet become habit; whistleblowers still go to major publications. But the potential is there. If anonymous sources start doing things themselves, the job of professional reporters will be seriously limited and conversely, the role of the newspaper. So newspapers could actually disappear (although we hope they don't) and the public may not even notice.  

Source: Nieman Watchdog