Gang bang: My "Earplug" dance music newsletter arrived in my inbox today, and the thing never ceases to amaze me: It is meticulously designed and lists seven editors, seven production team members, two designers and 15 contributors.

Yet it only features three one-paragraph news items culled from other sources around the web (in other words, they don't seem to be based on original research, interviews or, as we call it in the journalism biz, "reporting"), seven one-paragraph record reviews, one event announcement, six links to DJ mixes, and one blurb about a music video, with links. To top it off, some of the content appears to me to be paid "advertorial" or what we in the biz call "trade," which means we'll give you a shout if you do something for us. In any case, it's bad news for news consumers, who should always be told if something is paid for (an advertisement) rather than reported (news).

By comparison, at LA CityBeat, a major metropolitan alt (alternative) weekly where I work as senior writer, we have a circulation of 100,000 and a web presence (about to be redesigned). All our staff are serious journalists, all Los Angeles Times contributors (my deputy editor is also a contributor to Playboy, and another editor writes for Rolling Stone on the side). Okay, we have three main editors, one senior writer, one listings editor, and two production/design people. And this for a web site and a 64-page weekly newspaper.

Kids these days. If they aren't b.s.-ing, they have three times our workforce to put out an email newsletter with virtually 0 original reporting. Amazing.

Well, one of the people in charge, David Prince, I like. He's the man behind the M3 Summit in Miami, and I thought last year's event was well thought out and well-organized. Just not so sure about this newsletter.

You can sign up for it here.