Has digital photography devalued the photograph?

Quote taken from the interview with photographer Ricky Adam, Digital Vs Analogue photography - Full Interview http://digbmx.mpora.com/photo-ops/ricky-adam-destroying-everything/


"What role does post production play? Is there a difference between working with chemicals and working in a 'Digital' darkroom as fer as the 'Legitimacy' of the final image?" 
"So long as the image hasn't been manipulated in any way a good photo is a good photo, regardless of what short of camera was used to take it. You have to be a lot more resourceful when shooting film. For one you shoot fewer photos, but in doing so I think you learn a lot more about composition, lighting, ect. I often wonder how many more photos I would have if I could have shot digital when I first started out? Would I even have pursued photography? Possibly not...." 


My Response 
Film and digital photography have been competing for quite some time now , the digital world has taken over our day to day lives from how we cook to the way we read a book. 
Analogue photography fought to become an art form, and once it finally did it became more and more popular, this in the long run lead to more efficient ways of making a photograph, leading up to now the DSLR and to mention the printers.    
Having only ever really used Digital photography before university I liked the ease of being able to take as many images as possible, however now that I have used both 35mm and 120 film I feel that digital was not teaching me anything other then how to press a shutter. with analogue you have to arrange the shots and think about what you are taking. 
However this is not to say that digital is not to be congratulated on its cheep and easy ways of making your own photos, but this does not mean that they will be the beast out there.  
It is a hard question but I do not feel that analogue will be over taken as of yet by the digital world due to the quality and thought process that goes into making an image with the use of film.