Journalism vs paparazzi...

We discussed the difference between mainstream journalists and paparazzi in our first class. We seemed to reach a consensus then, but I thought this column by film critic Roger Ebert could provide more food for thought.

I particularly agree with these sentiments:

The CelebCult virus is eating our culture alive, and newspapers voluntarily expose themselves to it. It teaches shabby values to young people, festers unwholesome curiosity, violates privacy, and is indifferent to meaningful achievement.

...

The celebrity culture is infantilizing us. We are being trained not to think. It is not about the disappearance of film critics. We are the canaries. It is about the death of an intelligent and curious, readership, interested in significant things and able to think critically. It is about the failure of our educational system. It is not about dumbing-down. It is about snuffing out.

The news is still big. It's the newspapers that got small.

Highly subjective statements, sure. But they highlight the conflict between a newspaper's obligation to provide information that (it believes) people need, and information (some) people want.

Where do you stand in this debate?