As unpalatable as it may be to some people, we are a long way from a blogosphere that can replace traditional news media. Looking at news blogs in my area, the content is of questionable accuracy and the coverage of stories is uneven at best.

Stories are very one-sided, and there's seldom any indication that the blogger tried to speak to anyone to get some balancing comment. In fact, the bloggers seldom speak to anyone.

That seems to be the nature of blogs; they provide a soapbox allowing writers who hold strong opinions about a topic to spread them, and facts are cherry-picked to support those opinions (ironically, excessive opinion in news stories is often cited as a failing of the modern news media).

Compare that to newspapers (the ones in my area, at least) who still seem to believe in that quaint old idea that there are two - or more - sides to every story.

Bloggers lack the resources – especially time and contacts - to dig out original news consistently, too. They almost invariably provide commentary on stories that first appeared in the newspaper, often going so far as to link back to the original article.

As for Buffet, I think he's on the right track. While people are rightly reluctant to pay for news from AP quite a few will pay for good quality news about what's happening in their city if the price is right.

Disclaimer: I've worked as a journalist for 20 years, both print and digital.

At the risk of sounding naïve, I've found the key to getting the best performance out of staff is treating them like human beings, being honest to them and actually giving a damn about what's going on in their lives. Does that always work? No, of course not. You'll occasionally strike someone whose performance in real life doesn't measure up to their potential, as indicated by their qualifications. But anyone who thinks there's some magic way to make every staff member work to the best of their ability all the time – whether it be game mechanics or something else – is dreaming.