I don't really mind playing tabloid monster. I always liked those characters in the old movies.

Personally, as a print journalist, I always found the most interesting stories to be the ones hacks talked about in the bar after work.

Superior writers, videographers and other content makers want to work with their own kind and for their own kind.

Most good media come out of somebody saying, 'This should exist; this is something I want to read.

It's harder now for journalists to do stories about billionaires, like Peter Thiel, without having at the back of their minds the fear that maybe somebody deep-pocketed, you know, with limited resources is going to come after us and can my organization afford to defend me?

Henry Blodget does occasionally have a new idea. If you're making a point about aggregation or the emptiness of modern journalism, he's far from the best target. Try Huffpo - or Gawker writers whose souls have been corroded by irony.

I think people are sort of waking up to it now, how probably the biggest change in Internet media isn't the immediacy of it, or the low costs, but the measurability. Which is actually terrifying if you're a traditional journalist, and used to pushing what people ought to like, or what you think they ought to like.