The plot thickens

In responding to my post about Michael Agger's article, Eric M draws parallels to the film industry's own version of writing for the page vs. Web: video vs. film. I commend his comments to you, but I want to highlight this statement of his:

We would be wise to accept that a blog critic can not (and should not) compete with a traditional critic using traditional methods, but instead should forge a new path using the strengths of the Internet to his/her advantage.

Agreed, but what happens as those traditional methods disappear? And they are disappearing. It would be terrific to be able to read meaty criticism in the local newspaper, then go online and find another take. But when the paper cuts the critic's position, should we be content with the bullet points of an online review? To be fair, blogging critics write long (and how), thoughtful reviews, but Agger notes that blogging is exempt from the rules of online writing. That is, we seek out blogs that match our interests, and are content to read patiently on blogs. But that means that the population reading the paper isn't going to see these reviews, or be aware they even exist. Do we care if the general populace has access to arts criticism, even if they don't give a whit about last week's concert of the Poughkeepsie Chamber Rock Music Festival?