I think it will be important for journalists (and their companies) to really think about who their audiences are.
I think it will be important to simplify. And once that's done, I think the majority of people will eventually (I don't know when) pay for content because it will be of higher quality and relevance. (Some do this moderately well now.)
Frankly, I think all parties (i.e. Journalism as a whole) will probably benefit in the long-run. You may see smaller organizations, but that should enable them to adapt more efficiently as things evolve.
The key here, in my opinion, is to not get caught up in fast and excessive growth. You may even extend that to "pull-back/slow down" if you're growing too fast.
"Perhaps there's a lesson in this for the parents of other curious children who, from the start, require the freedom to meet life on their own terms: It is that there is no statute of limitations on the dreams you have for your children. And there is no way to predict how much delight you might feel when those dreams are realized in a far different way than you could have imagined."
I was just commenting on the quotation in the post.
I think it would be erroneous to conclude that a student is not "good" because he/she receives a "C" in an economics course. Perhaps the student was very ill that quarter or was busy building some really great thing.
But even if they slacked off, they may want to be disciplined. Better yet, they may be willing to listen. In which case, one can probably be taught discipline.
I think one of the defining characteristics that differentiates "good" from "great" is discipline. Good students possess great skills, but they lack discipline.
Wow.