Very good points, of course, and ones that I don’t at all disagree with. The language of struggle is one I usually try to avoid w/r/t new technologies (and you think I’d know better, having just finished a book about the misuses of exactly that kind of language in writing about the relationship between the novel and television). Perhaps it’s more accurate to say that, rather than “wresting” power from traditional media structures, these relatively new technologies allow communicators simply to evade those power structures altogether. (Witness today’s post on academic anxieties about blogging.) Where there is the impression of “wresting” or struggling or any kind of combat among media, it’s from the perspective of the older forms — and it’s important to hear their insistence on these notions of combat for what they are. The traditional media don’t simply debate the merits of these technologies, but repeatedly speak anxiously about them, about the effects they’re having on the kids today, or about the absence of journalistic standards they promote, or whathaveyou. These anxieties are always about their own obsolescence — if any kid with a phone camera and a website can broadcast live from the scene of some happening or other, does anyone really need television anymore?
I could go on. As I said, I’ve got a whole book about this stuff. But yes, I totally agree with you, no question, is the main point.