The trend towards amateur photography

I am an amateur photographer. And I'd say that I'm a serious one at that, even if I'm not particularly talented. Once I get my (for the moment) dream camera, a Canon 6.3 megapixel digital SLR, I would love to happen upon an unfolding news story and get the pics of the event. But I'm getting concerned about the media not only relying on amateur photography for unfolding news events, but also soliciting it. Last week, after the London bombings, it became very apparent that digital cameras and digital phone cameras were phasing out the professional photographer a bit in favor of on the scene eye witnesses. That makes all the sense in the world, because unless a pro is tipped off or in the wrong place at the right time, they are no going to get the gripping photos that on scene witnesses will. But there could be a dark side to this.

I say this because I was reading the Janesville Gazette today, and they had the story of a fire here in my hometown. On the homepage, they had a picture of the aftermath, and beneath it this request:

Do you have photos of the fire?
Send your digital images to gazextra@gazetteextra.com, and we'll post them online.

Below that was a link to a gallery of the pics they had received. There is nothing inherently wrong with that, but here is my concern. As people become aware that the media is willing to use their amateur pics, more and more people are going to rush to the scene of these events to try to get "the" picture. Emergency services personnel do not need that. In emergency situations, they have their hands full enough without having to worry about idiots trying to get money shots of the event. Unfortunately, I see a future where every fool with a camera rushes to a scene where they aren't needed, making the situation worse for everyone.