The place where the eventual loss of film cameras will really be felt is in publishing, especially newspapers if they last as long as film cameras. Very few papers have made arrangements to keep all the shots taken at an assignment. In the film days the photographer would put all the negs from a shoot in an envelope marked with the date, story slug and various other info. That’s no longer done. They hang on to the images that are actually published and a couple of others that were put into the archive system to be available to reporters, page designers and editors. The newspaper where I worked had negs going back over 80 years, often with a neatly folded copy of the article in which the pictures were used.
A lot of really important pictures have surfaced over the years when someone went back into the files to see what else was shot that day. It was not uncommon for the photographer to shoot five or six rolls of film and then keep it all filed away.
Like LA Times and Al Reuters:
Photojournalism in Crisis (Dinosaur Media DeathWatch™) (Editor & Publisher August 18, 2006 David D. Perlmutter)
Those negatives used to provide a "paper trail". Negatives were even used in the OJ Case to show a historical timeline that OJ owned such a pair of shoes.
They can do the same thing, except at much less cost. Fill high capacity flash/SD cards with digital images, archive them together with the story slug to a tape drive. Digital tape is a very stable medium for data storage unlike HDD, flash, CD-R/DVD-R, etc.