It did not take long for the publishing industry to form itself into the system we recognize. The tidy hierarchy — publisher; editors; journalists and designers; production, printing and fulfillment — standing between us and the news has existed since the early 19^th century. Once the technology was affordable, replicable and high quality, printed media rolled off the presses and into people’s homes in the millions.

And there it stayed. The news changed every day, this month’s issue of a magazine was different from last month’s, but the way things were done and by whom remained the same — almost 200 years of tried and true methodology and spectacular success.

Not anymore. The hierarchy was blown apart, first, by the Internet and, now, by the change the Internet has wrought.

We no longer accept that single point of access to information. We no longer rely solely on that one linear progression from news gathering to delivery. Because of the Internet, we could read our local paper or one from the other side of the world — access to information exploded. Because of Web 2.0, the read-write Web, we could join the ecosystem or set up our own. We could all be journalists and publishers. To add complexity, no one had to tell a story with words alone. The print media of words and pictures bled over into broadcast, with moving images and sound. Interactivity added even more complexity and richness to what had been a passive experience.

The hierarchy could no longer spoon feed us information. We could feed ourselves and each other if we chose.

Ceci n’est pas une pipe

Much of the discomfort with the reinvention of media stems from the fact that the industry did not think of itself as an ecosystem, a living thing that would inevitably change. The hierarchy hardened over time into simply “the way things are done.”

Professional journalists were disdainful of citizen journalists — no fact checking, no rigorous editorial process, no vetting of quality and accuracy. Publishers were disdainful of bloggers — amateurish opinion spouting. Editors were disdainful of everything because that’s their job. Printers were sure that a $90 billion industry could not disappear or even appreciably shrink. As long as print delivered the audience, advertisers financed it.

Problem was the audience loved the new stuff. It was shiny and fun and under their control.

When USA Today was first launching usatoday.com, one of the internal debates was “when is news news.” The answer, says Jeff Webber, senior vice president and publisher of usatoday.com, is “news is news when it happens.” It does not wait for tomorrow’s print edition. Instantaneous access created instantaneous demand and the necessity to report and publish in whichever medium is quickest. If it fits with the print schedule, put it in print; if the Web is faster, put it there. If the story can be told in text, fine. If not, add rich media, add interactivity. Use the media to the full extent of its capability in order to get the news out there in formats and on platforms readers want.

That meant realizing that the hierarchy was subject to change. It was not cast in stone. It was a living thing that would have to adapt or die.

A Fresh, Ferocious Wave will examine the publishing ecosystem in two parts: This week, how things are published now; next week, transparent journalism.