I found this interesting in a number of ways, firstly the increased numbers of women and minority shooters getting the opportunity to shoot is a great thing, more points of view and ways of seeing are always a good thing.
There were some areas that I wasnt quite so sure about;
The thought of sending a local in to shoot rather than sending a photographer over to cover an event is an interesting one, I relish the chance to see new work, and to see ways of looking at situations from people with knowledge, familiarity or access that I or a photographer being dropped in might not have.
However, then I look at photographer's like Nachtwey and McCullin, and their work is incredible, so the traditional model hasn't exactly failed there.
I suspect the change is more to do with the rush to publish and be first with a story rather than a desire to empower and present the local viewpoint.
Secondly the push for photojournalists to do video too.
I realise that this isn't going away, it does make me think that we're probably undermining/undervaluing actual video people though, and it's not possible to do photo and video at the same time, so it strikes me as a compromise choice rather than a deliberate choice for the best possible outcome.
Also it somewhat undermines the "it's now accessible to way more people" narrative as soon as you read that she managed to intern at the NY Times.