there's an insight of good analysis here, though, in the sense that it's recognizing that the idea of a newspaper may be entering into the realm of history, in favour of the idea of a writer. if we're pondering the absurdity of treating individual media companies like individual citizens and giving them collective bargaining power, then maybe it's time to liquidate the papers and give those rights to the individuals that work there, instead.
if this is trying to be a socialist approach, it's missing the point: the revolution is in the mode of production.
the industry should be encouraged to adapt - and fail, when the circumstances call for it - rather than be propped up by a government trying to artificially maintain an obsolete status quo. things change; everything dies. you adjust, or you disappear.
i don't know exactly what the media of the future looks like, nobody does. but, if the scare mongering is that we're going to lose the establishment media, i'd instead state "good riddance". i would rather see a vibrant blogosphere of freelancers develop that operates outside of the realm of business normality, and if the best counter-argument lies in the ability of the mainstream media to shape and control opinion for the state, i'd suggest it's rather clear that that battle has already been lost.
the newspaper was the invention of the printing press; what the website will replace that with may not be clear, but what is certain is that it cannot be reversed.
if there's anything to be socialized, here, it ought to be in the means of production, and i think there's a lot of space to nationalize large amounts of what these tech companies do.
i am personally content to write in freedom, in exchange for a gai. i wouldn't have it any other way.