It interesting to note that Radio took control of Media Works and NZME because their boards looked at revenue figures and they were the only media not declining. The obvious mistake here is that it isn't because of amazing thought leadership and a great channel, but simply because Radio will be one of the last media channels truly digitally disrupted.
It won't be tomorrow, but come virtual personal assistants, actually wearable google glass, driverless cars, etc. and we'll see Radio collapse at a speed that might rival print's collapse. If I'm in a car with no driver I'm sure as heck not listening to the radio.
In terms of monetizing online content I think you should be looking at some of the solutions our friends at APN and Fairfax have largely overlooked. Instead of paywalls and native advertising they should probably have started with velvet ropes and small things. (they had the opportunity, they just don't get it)
Those terms come from some excellent articles on the topic my Mathew Ingram at GigaOm and Ken Doctor at newsonomics. I highly recommend looking up their work and/or chatting with me over coffee.
I have a difficult time calling someone who has as their Rule #1 that 'Explaining is Losing' a journalist. To me Journalism is about explaining things, not doing things.
This issue isn't so much that Pead did anything wrong in providing free product to influencers, the real issue is that naive influencers can degrade the trust of their followers by not mentioning when they get something free (and it is later found out they did as in this case). Good article on social media influence from SXSW here: http://storify.com/tonia_ries/influence
The conclusion from everyone one the expert panel seems to have been that everyone tweeting about #myfoodbag should have mentioned they got it free, but they don't have to put #ad.