David Griffin, writing at one of National Geographic's blogs --- Editor's Pick blog (via Burn magazine ) explores how the sudden surge in digital capability is affecting the viability of being a professional "photojournalist" today. Photojournalist is a misnomer since some of the images Griffin uses to make his argument are landscapes.

In the first post Griffin says that the combination of digital capture and digital delivery (via the web) is rapidly eliminating exclusive characteristics which defined what it means to be a professional photojournalist. Simply put, today’s digital advances are leveling the playing field between enthusiast (amateur) and professional.

Griffin says that the:

sudden flood of competent images would not be creating as much of an issue for the pro, if it were not for the web. The wonderful phenomena (and I do think it is a good thing overall) of the interconnected, digital photography community helps erode another defining support of the professional photographer: the once exclusive ability to be published. With the Internet, almost anyone can distribute their work (and even used by the same publications that assign professionals).

Griffin's response is consistency. To be a professional photographer:

you need to be able to make more than just one great image—you have to make them all the time. Any publication dedicating resources to the creation of original photography needs to be assured that the photographers on assignment will come back with the goods....If the [National] Geographic was only looking for photographers that only create single images, the playing field of candidates would be very large indeed. But when we seek out a photographer they must prove (before they get an assignment) that they have a consistent vision and a masterful sense of narrative.