I’ve worked for the majority of my life as a design resource, and currently the work splits 70/30 in favour of print media. Some of this is – understandably – beacuse I’m a hard-core typographer. And whilst I delude myself into thinking that I’m au courant, I suspect that some of my customers hire me for an ironic retro feel.

What isn’t retro, however, is our need for objective and honest reportage, unpaltable as it may be. Publications such as El Pais, The Washington Post, The Guardian, Le Monde and the Berliner Zeitung may all be considered “Papers of Record”. And all use diverse channels to market.

The published material is gathered by professional journalists. A professional is paid to deliver on time, on budget and to the brief. In this case the brief is for objectivity. Certainly an enthusiastic amateur, working without constraints, may produce valuable content – and there are many currently publishing material on-line.

The difficulty that we have as consumers lies is that we expect on-line content of record to be both free at the point of delivery whilst retaining integrity. This, for me, is the heart of Alan Rusbridger’s address.

As a soi-disant anarcho-capitalist I am countering the revisionist lackeys of the . . . (trails off into yet another tiresome rant . . .)

Oh yes. Saw Nordwand last night. A mighty film covering the 1938 attempt on the Eiger. Get the DVD here, worth every penny …

I see this as the problem though:

Now, of course, lots of journalists find this hard to take. We are supposed to be the ones in the know, or with special access or insights. “Social media is interesting,” say the digital sceptics, “but it may be transient – and it has got nothing to do with what we do. Our brands are about authority.”

But this position – that journalists are uniquely knowledgeable and insightful – is a hard one to sustain to anyone who looks at the blogosphere…