The Head Ho of PuffHo Speaketh!

Yes, she did. She talked about old media and new media. Here, use some muffling ear plugs and listen:

[The m]edia is in an incredible time of transition. [I]t was new media that played a huge part in bringing the News of the World down so fast. [T]he unique ability of new media is to stay on a story and doggedly stay on a story until we have an impact. Until we break through. The future belongs to those who bring together the best of old media, fact-checking, accuracy, transparency, and the best of new media, which is interactivity, engagement with our readers, and real-time provision of information.

Got that? New media is gooder than old media. Why? Because real-time, fact-checking and staying the course. [Yes, why not pick old buzz-phrases for the new media?]

Hey Arianna, remember the campaign of yours to make banks 'too big to fail' smaller? Perhaps if I refreshed your memory:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-tv/arianna-move-your-money-t_b_419181.html

So what happened to it? Did you doggedly stay with the story to see what happened to the people who followed through and moved their money to smaller banks?

Or did you drop out when you found out that small banks who you had been championing also opposed reform like the big banks? In other words, all the small banks wanted to do was to become big banks. They too wanted to be too big to fail.

Also, did you mention how you don't have to pay new media writers who make you rich?

http://econsultancy.com/us/blog/6048-the-huffington-post-s-guide-to-profitability-view-writers-as-hobbyists

Oh, and new media did not bring down News of the World, either. They feasted on the body, yes. The work was done by The Guardian and the New York Times.  Just good journalism.