Yes, it's going to be an interesting few years and I've enjoyed your post, David, as much as your comments, Peter.

I'm an avid blogger because it  helps me think about our world around us and lets me vent off steam. Twitter is fun too insofar as there's the challenge of trying to make a "striking" comment in 140 characters...Perhaps one day all this activitiy will help me market an eventual book but...But, where I agree with you David, what is much more fun than building one's "presence on line" is to get on with the "real work" of writing (whether fiction or non-fiction, it's the same: writing is much more fun than tweeting!). 

Since Amanda Hocking's success, the "bad" reputation that used to be attached to self-publishing - including such derogatory terms as "vanity press" - has somehow dissolved. It's become ok, even smart, to consider self-publishing in the e-book market. But...there are many buts and I agree with just about everything you said. The biggest "but" is the amount of self-marketing that is required to stand out in this rapidly swelling tsunami of digital publications.

Will the better writers somehow stand out in the end? The e-book market has a "long tail": e-books are on virtual shelves "forever" while printed books disappear in a matter of months (which is why publishers pull out all the guns at launching time!). But will the best e-books float up and surface? I doubt it. There are over 700,000 titles on Kindle - how do I find those I would enjoy reading? Even as a reader it's tough work - imagine as a writer having to self-promote! 

Compared to the mp3.com disaster, perhaps our only consolation is that there many more people who think they are musicians and can make some sort of (musical) noise than there are writers who can (actually) write.

Bottomline, publishers and editors and agents all have a role to play as "gatekeepers" - which is why Amanda Hocking accepted that multi-million contract from St Martin's Press. She's no fool, she knows on which side her bread is buttered! 