Definitely some interesting thoughts here, but the author is overreaching.<p>> <i>Google/Yahoo news isn't the new model - they've been surpassed by Facebook already.</i><p>Including Yahoo here lends the sentence credibility because of how they have been failing at everything they try to do for years, but this is just projecting trends into the future with little justification. Facebook or Twitter have not yet proven that they can harvest all their data to produce a search engine that can rival Google. Without that they simply don't have the form factor to dominate news.<p>> <i>The good news for media is that when they embraces the new model, I think they will make far more money than they ever have in the past due to the combination of broader distribution and better targeting leading to larger ad revenues.</i><p>This is incumbent on the aggregator having the right combination of UX acumen and generous profit sharing with publishers. But even if that pans out, "broader distribution" also means more competition for ever-thinner attention, and also the data available on the Internet may reveal that old advertising budgets were unjustified. If they aren't making more money, then publishers are not going to cede control to an aggregator, they'll go down with the ship if they have to.<p>Also, I don't think branded channels are going anywhere. People crave a certain amount of diversity. If Facebook comes to dominate news, however unlikely, there will be rebellion and many trendsetters will use something different, <i>even if inferior</i>, just for differences sake.