For starters, I know less about what's going on. I'm less engaged in the cut-and-thrust and don't feel entitled to comment on everything that floats by. I reject the Olympian, detached pronouncements of many critics and don't want to fall prey to that myself. I've always disdained those who "wait up in the hills until the battle is over and then come down to shoot the wounded."
I've also concluded that much of what passes for debate in the field nowadays is tired, threadbare and unproductive. There's little to be gained from pointing out the factual errors underlying some doomsayers' predictions, for example; it doesn't change their behavior. There's no point encouraging publishers worried about paying the rent to spend more time pondering the relative value of a newsriver versus a topics page.
I remain optimistic about the future of a professional journalism that follows standards and applies expertise to help people verify and filter their information overload. While tomorrow's journalism won't be a mirror of today's, neither is it likely to involve rejection of all today's institutions and standards.
And, in any case, the 140-character frame of Twitter seems to fit both my mood and my schedule better than longer blog posts most days. I am more active there, as @howardweaver, commenting on a range of topics, certainly including news and journalism. You might enjoy the occasional tweets of "AP Moron Watch" examples, or episodic terse exchanges with the gravedancers.
I'll continue to use this space for subjects where I think I have something valuable to add. And I remain eager to hear from you, here or at howard (dot) weaver (at) gmail dot com.