Wealthy and connected?

Peter Wilby's rant in today's MediaGuardian arguing that journalism is a profession for the wealthy and connected seems a little skewed.
He makes the legitimate point that to be able to forge a career in the media some kind of expensive postgraduate qualification is necessary. As a result, it excludes people who cannot afford the fees. He also argues that the work experience so crucial to advancement is the preserve of people living in and around London or those who can afford to pay for somewhere to stay and outlines the supposed small pool of universities from which students on my course are taken.
While there are a number from Oxford, Cambridge, Bristol and Leeds there are also people from Exeter, St Andrews, Manchester, UCL, Imperial, Durham and Lancashire. His argument that we are not representative of the population because these universities take people from fee-paying schools is misguided. While a number did go to private or public schools, they were all selective, meaning they were already deemed clever enough to meet the standards of the establishment. It makes sense they would then go on to good universities and get places on competitive postgraduate courses.
His argument that courses such as the one I am undertaking are the privilege of the wealthy is undermined by his own employer.
The Scott Trust, which owns the Guardian, is paying the fees of three of my colleagues who might not otherwise be able to cover the expense. Not only that but the trust sets them up with work experience at papers such as the Guardian, Observer and MEN and pays accommodation costs over the holidays.
In addition, I was given funding by the Chancellor of my undergraduate university and a number of other colleagues have funding from the AHRC and have bank loans.
Every single person at City has worked incredibly hard to be there and forge a career for themselves in a highly competitive and ruthless industry. We have already competed to get on the course and this experience has set us up to carry on competing for jobs and promotions and whatever else comes our way.
Such a narrow minded view of his own profession shows Wilby as a man keen to see the worst in his successors, instead of supporting and encouraging those entering the industry at such a precarious time.