But I see it more as a first, rather utopian attempt that fell foul of internal contradictions and unstated hierarchical snarl-ups, then a refoundation that unfortunately based itself too much on the '80s enterprise-and-capital mantra. And ended up, not so much losing oomph as selling out.
Any organization has the recurrent problem of re-inventing itself, to indulge in pop-management newspeak. To go back and question a fundamental premise of the organization when that premise was responsible for the early success - apparent or real - is, well, hard work. The greater the investment, so to speak, in the underlying cognitive basis of the organization the greater the barriers to junking it as it proves inadequate to the task at hand.
In this case the positive feedback of spontaneous 'Let It All Hang Out' slowing dwindled as the daily grind of putting out a daily newspaper with not enough money to met the payroll.
There are two ways to meet this: (1) Head-on and reduce staff until income equals outgo or (2) Skate-by and get a quick-fix capital infusion. The first is short-term pain and long-term potential. The second is proping-up the short-term at the expense of long-term potential.
