I don't pretend to know...

...what the future holds for journalism in this Age of the Internet, but I'll take a few stabs at it anyway.

First of all, paywalls won't work. James Fallows has a piece in the current Atlantic, "How to Save the News," in which he argues that consumers will eventually pay for content. In fact, he writes, Google is counting on it. Sorry, but I'm not buying it; there's just too much free information on the Internet. Whenever I run into a paywall (like at the New Republic), I just move on; there's tons of other stuff to read out there. No one has a monopoly on interesting or informative content. When the New York Times introduces its paywall next year, I expect it to be short-lived. And don't bring up the Wall Street Journal and its "successful" paywall; the Journal's subscriptions are tax-deductible. And anyway, I just don't see them working long-term. There's almost nothing that these papers have that you can't find for free.

So what will happen? I'm not sure, but I think unbundling is a good bet. How much of any one newspaper do you read? All of it? What if you could get your national news from the New York Times, your business news from Bloomberg, your sports from ESPN, and your local news from the Chicago Tribune? What's that you say? You already do? So unbundling is already upon us. What's another word for this trend? Blogging.

According to Steve Jobs, "I don't want to see us descend into a nation of bloggers...I think we need editorial oversight now more than ever. Anything we can do to help newspapers find new ways of expression that will help them get paid, I am all for."

Now Steve Jobs is one of the smartest guys in America. Apple is now larger than Microsoft (who woulda thunk it?). But I have news for Jobs: we've already "descended" into a nation of bloggers -- and we'll continue to do so.

My prediction is that, more and more, readers will turn to blogs for their information. Are you one of the 10% or so in your town who cares about the local goings on? You'll find some blogger who also cares. Interested in the sports of your alma mater? You'll find a blog to read. Afghanistan? The oil spill? Gardening? Whatever your passion, chances are you can find a blogger who shares your interest.

So how will they get paid? Maybe they won't. Maybe, like YouTube or all the other citizen videos we've become accustomed to (like the Rodney King beating or Senator George Allen's "macaca" moment), individuals will supply information for free. Maybe some of them will make a few bucks from advertising. And maybe a very, very few will actually make a living from selling ads. But in the future, maybe journalism will be supplied mostly by amateurs on aggregated sites. And what's another word for an aggregated site? A "newspaper." (If this all sounds circular, it's because it is.)

But the bottom line is that journalists will not get paid like they used to. And all those foreign bureaus that never paid their way anyway? They'll have to learn to live on a lot less.