Maybe I'm naive as someone who has built a career in the Internet, but I still don't understand a fundamental issue about local media. IT departments at most local media companies are more often an afterthought than a strategic asset. Local media has dealt with the Internet as a "necessary evil" instead of an opportunity for disruption.
The tech industry has examples of things that appear to be "out of left field." Consider the case of Amazon -- originally founded as an online bookseller, they branched out into other retail products. Then they did the unfathomable: they launched Amazon Web Services to get into the application and data hosting/services business. They didn't know where that business was headed, but they knew there was growth. Google has launched a variety of experiments -- some fruitful like Google Docs and others not so successful. But they're willingness to think expansively about their business is a major contributor to shareholder value and to serendipity that drives future growth.
I don't see similar experimentation yet in the local media business. I am not sure if it is a lack of commitment, the lack of developer & IT business talent, or what. But you'd think that there would be a few cases of major media companies tackling new challenges.
As a direct result, you've seen innovations from disruptors like Craigslist, match.com, eHarmony, Zillow, blogging, hyperlocal publications, Google (News) itself, and others. None of them could take down a local media powerhouse, but collectively, they have the potential to take all the economic value once owned by the local newspaper.
So here's what I don't get...
If local media sees all this disruption coming from IT, why wouldn't local media treat IT as a STRATEGIC IMPERATIVE moving forward?