It's all in the second paragraph... the "disrespect" thing. Most of this flows from his profound disappointment that he's not hailed as a genius, a modern day Ansel Adams, for having owned the technology used here.
Mr. Kosner was must have cut those "History of Journalism 101" lectures
Hard to imagine someone can make that print/web argument if they've EVER been exposed to Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst, the emperors of "yellow journalism". Complaints of Internet superficiality, flash-and-trash, shallow reporting, clickbait... they're all mirrored precisely in those early, populist, "penny press" newspapers. This was not an Internet invention.
The sweetest irony? That those who tout their formal, traditional journalism educational credentials could forget their own profession's earliest history... and its darkest moments.
The ultimate irony is that retransmission is a dead issue, in the most-deadest division of the content delivery universe. The ability to retransmit local OTA television is valued by fewer and fewer people every month, even while retransmission fees become an increasingly greater proportion of network revenue -- witness Les Moonves' public shit-fit over Aereo for no other reason than lost retransmission fees. So... take your weakest, most trivial, soon-to-be-dead issue, and wave it in the public eye... brilliant.
I've heard this repeated for at least twenty years... that it doesn't matter an awful lot who gets elected, since policy is effectively shaped by tens of thousands of mid-level bureaucrats, and they pretty much don't care who got elected, what party and what their campaign promises were. I haven't seen it disproved yet... bad news for progress, but good news in the sense that dimwitted partisans can't get much done to advance their agendas either.