For the past decades, scholars, journalists and the news industry have pondered “the future of journalism”. Everyone seems to have a “hot take” on what’s coming up. Given this interest, it is worth probing the usefulness of forecasting the future of journalism, given the fluidity of journalism as a social institution, the news industry, and the shape-shifting condition of news and information in the digital society? The debate about the future needs to recognize that journalism is always plural. That nothing about journalism can be boxed in singular categories. That there is no single future because there is no single journalism. Speaking in plural might nudge the debate in a productive direction—thinking about differences, drivers of change, options, and comparisons, instead of tacitly assuming that “journalism” is somewhat cohesive or that it is on its way towards a common future. This is the argument that I present here.