In general, I agree with much of your assessment.

However, I do find it ironic that you think academic jobs (the ability to get paid for a service) are not being threatened by robots (depending on if you strictly define robots as mechanical/physical vs digital). Later in your response, you reference the most obvious example of this. Technologies (such as Medium) are providing a way for people to get a service (news/op-ed content) without having to pay for it (like they would if they subscribed to the Economist for example).

The point I was making is that robots do not yet account for a significant portion of academic output. It’s one thing for new technology to disrupt old media paradigms and give millions more people a platform by which to distribute content, but it’s quite another to be working at a factory alongside a fellow human being one day and, on the next day, be working alongside a machine that made that fellow human being’s job obsolete. It’s easier to see the writing on the wall in the latter case, especially if you’re the one that got replaced.