The newspapers are facing a crisis, and the news is more commonly read on the internet. It has not always been like this. In this project we examine the devel-opment of the state of the media, and the democratic consequences that follow. Our project starts from the following problem definition: How has the state of the media evolved from the first newspapers up until today, and what impact has it had, and does it continue to have to the democracy? We have divided our problem up into the following work questions. - How does Habermas’ theory on the public sphere relate to the actual develop-ment in the state of the media, before the year 2000 and after, and in the public debate? - How can we use Castells’ and Hardt & Negri’s theories to describe the devel-opment of the state of the media from the millennium until today? - What pros and cons can we find in digital news dissemination? - What are the consequences in the development towards the democracy? To answer our problem definition, we have built our project up around a historic-empiric section about the development of the state of the media before and after the year 2000. Next, a theory-section about Habermas’ theory on the public sphere, Castells’ theory on the network society and the new ways of communication, and some additional theory to back it up. These will help us explain the contexts that exist between the development and the democracy. We have also made some inter-views with a head of news at a major Danish newspaper, and a media-expert, which add qualitative expert-statements regarding our problem. On the basis of historic-empery, theory and interviews, we have analysed and discussed the problem. This leads to the following conclusion: We are on the brink of a historic boundary within the media. The traditional media is facing a serious crisis, and the digitalized media is expanding rapidly. The new digital media consumption can bring a new, postmodern public sphere, in which the citizens have a whole new set of possibilities in submitting critical views, debating and possibly gaining political influence, but the potential does not seem fulfilled. We can conclude that the internet media is not yet ready to dominate the entire state of the media, without it causing serious democratic consequences. If the new media is to create a new space for dialogue, which will benefit and strengthen the democracy, there must be taken some precautions, which will counter and control the media development. It is important that the new media receives enough resources to be able to act as the fourth power of the State in the future by putting relevant topics on the agenda for debate, since this is essential for a well-functioning democracy.