on media convergence

I am already somewhat familiar with the idea of media convergence because I used to want to do journalism and learned about this before. I think “Worship at the Altar…” points out good examples of what convergence is. With all of the different types of media and technology (specifically Web 2.0) available, media was destined to collide in a type of head on collision. With virtually anyone able to be a “journalist” anymore, different types of media are always playing off one another. For instance, the example of the movie being recorded and put on the internet was easily predictable with the invention of cell phone cameras. I knew this would happen, because I predicted this to my friends back when these were first coming out. Is this good or bad for society? Well, it is bad for the people involved in the production of the movie, because this loses them money. But then again, it does give them more access and exposure. But how much exposure is appropriate? With the Bert and Osama example, clearly this boy had the right to make a website and to innocently post Bert’s picture with Osama. Also, the middle eastern man had the right to print it and put it on his posters. Also, Sesame Street has the right to be angry about one of their characters being associated with terrorism. This is the problem that will have to be answered with media convergence since it is such a new concept. How much is too much? Should all media be allowed to cover whatever they want and use any type of media available to do so? I don’t even know what to think.