As tools for community building, a source of reference and even as tools for citizen and community-based journalism, I think blogs and wikis serve a key role. But, caveat emptor. The grassroots nature of these new media mean that quality control is ad hoc. The consensus decides and collective QC is applied, which is all fine in theory if you have a consistent group or community who is fair-minded and contains a healthy mix of members with enough differences in opinion to provide balance.

Very unlikely in the online world of staunchly supported tight-knit groups. The chances are that most blogs, wikis and community sites tend to bring together like-minded and opinioned souls, all looking to share their own views of the world among others with much the same views. When they're not flaming one another.

I think blogs and wikis will continue to thrive and find a role in building communities and offering people to opportunity to share their views, comments and engage in ways not possible before. They will also provide useful nuggets of information that often would remain buried.

But they should not herald a diminished role for the traditional media. In fact the reverse is true--as other media channels and innovations emerge, the glut of information blasting down people's broadband connections will mean any right-minded individual is going to rely increasingly on his or her trusted media to provide the fair and objective view, not the most popular or sensationalist view.

PS: A wiki (according to Wikipedia) is a type of website that allows anyone visiting the site to add, remove, or otherwise edit all content, quickly and easily, often without the need for registration. This ease of interaction and operation makes a wiki an effective tool for collaborative writing. A blog or Weblog (again according to Wikipedia) is a website in which items are posted on a regular basis and displayed with the newest at the top. Like other media, blogs often focus on a particular subject, such as food, politics, or local news.