The presumption is that the AP and Reuters will continue tobe the sources. With the erosion of the purveyor base will come the erosion of the two providers.
The concept amounts to the tail wagging the newspaper dogs. In reality, no dogs no tails. The AP has acknowledged problems and may be very sick.
The process underway involves death or near death and replacement by some unknown but presently budding solution. News on paper printed once a day and delivered by hand to the reader is no longer viable. The news is too late and too expensive. The consumers to whom ads are directed no longer read the papers.
Well, let's keep an eye on it and see.
My experience has been along the lines of cfrel's local paper experience.
The Ft Worthless Star Telegram and Dallas Morning Snooze over the years have come pretty much to be devoid of originally researched content, because I think, there is less risk of libel suits behind the comfy liability contracts of AP. Mostly AP and other wire "staff" in the byline, meaning the local editor doesn't have to worry about the content.
Even if all the paper-papers eventually disappear, (weren't books supposed to be replaced by the internet, too?) all of the other radio and news and internet online fronts will still use it as a script. CNN in the airports, for example, just puts stock video clips in front of chicks reading AP and Reuters headlines.
In an age where the Pres Elect was sending out teams of lawyers to intimidate and suppress dissent in locales (but won't even deign to respond to a citizen's lawsuit against him, I personally don't see the potential for a hard-nosed reporter to go toe-to-toe with these people without the classical scene of the paper company's backing, with the seasoned Editor, sleeves rolled up in the corner office Watergate style.