Who is a journalist?
What does it take to be a journalist? It must be something more than a credential hanging around ones neck. Those credentials are not licenses, nor are they regulated. Journalism is not a regulated profession, and shouldn’t be. Yet the title of (big J) “Journalist” cannot be conferred simply because someone looks the part. Any and all equipment is publicly available to any consumer motivated to spend the money. With the improvement of consumer technology and the advent of publishing on the Internet, the line between journalist and consumer have all but been erased. Before assessing that a person is a journalist and according them the respect that comes with the title, we should consider their position, whether journalism is the person’s primary pursuit, and reputation. We should not hand out the title of journalist simply because the person has a journalism education, publishes their content for the public, or because they aspire to be one.
Clearly, I am defining journalism in a way that is exclusive to some people who are clearly members of the media, and it is important to note that they are not all to be considered journalists under my definition. This is not in an attempt to be bigoted or elitist, but rather an attempt to protect the reputation of those content producers worthy of the level of respect that comes with the title “journalist.” It is by strict adherence to the mutually agreed upon ethics of journalism and my additional three criterions that I will define journalism and judge those worthy of the title.
Publishing for the public, might once have been the ability of media alone, but now that criterion is limited in importance since anyone can publish their own works. Blogging hit the big time as a way to publish news when Matt Drudge of the Drudge Report broke the Lewinsky Scandal with a blog post about Newsweek editors electing not to publish their investigation of the story. (Drudge, 1998) Since that time, approximately 57% of Americans and 73% of Europeans and Asians have become bloggers. (Technorati, 2008) 42% of the more than 133 million blogs indexed by Technorati are about news, making it the 4th most popular topic overall.
I propose that many of these bloggers, even the professional ones who make a living with it, are more like columnists than journalists and should not be afforded the title. It is not because of their medium that I propose we withhold the title of journalist from them, but rather because so many of them are writing opinions about the news rather than breaking it. I suggest we avoid calling most of them journalists for the same reason we make sure to carefully separate opinion columns from news stories in a newspaper or broadcast. The Society of Professional Journalists calls explicitly for this kind of separation of news from opinion in their code of ethics: “Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.” (SPJ, 2009)
Perhaps the most interesting case study in mixing opinion with journalism would be the evolution of Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show.” Hosted for the past 11 years by Jon Stewart, the show has a decidedly (and unabashed) leftward slant but puts a premium on finding humorous mistakes from both sides of the aisle. Under Stewart’s leadership “The Daily Show” has gone beyond satire in both content and popularity. For many in their teens and twenties it has become a frequent source of national news. Jon Stewart even tied Tom Brokaw, Brian Williams, and other legitimate news anchors among admired journalists. (Kakutani, 2008) Stewart has taken the program into controversies, at times, with the intent of exposing hypocrisy or unethical behavior in politics or the media. A poignant example of this comes from April 4, 2006, when Stewart confronted then-presidential candidate John McCain about his choice give a commencement address at a university founded by Jerry Fallwell, whom McCain had previously renounced as intolerant. Stewart read this to introduce the segment: “Has John McCain’s Straight Talk Express been re-routed through bullshit-town?” (Stewart, 2006)
Some commentators, including Stewart’s “The Daily Show,” are also news curators. Like them or not, Glen Beck, Nancy Grace, Bill O’Rilley, Steven Colbert, Andy Rooney, Clarance Page, George Will and so many other print, television, and multimedia personalities fit both of these titles. Curation is a step beyond aggregation because they not only gather stories, they apply their stamp to them. They do very little actual news contribution, and instead they pick and choose the existing stories to highlight, review, and comment on. (Rosenbaum, 2009)
While applying opinions, there are legal boundaries that these commentators-gone-curators should abide by. The government, of course, can not make any laws pertaining to prior restraint, but time has developed a good amount of civil law that tells us what speech is protected after publication. While the Supreme Court of the United States has said, “there is no such thing as a false idea,” (Gertz V. Robert Welch, Inc. Carter, Franklin & Wright 2008) it does not mean that all speech is protected. Cases including Milkovich V. Lorain Journal Co. (Carter, Franklin & Wright 2008) and Ollman V. Evans (Carter, Franklin & Wright 2008) show us that speech of incitement or known false statements of the facts are never protected under the first amendment. These legal issues should never be potential hurdles for a true journalist, however. If they follow the rules of truthfulness and accountability set out by the Society of Professional Journalists, the Radio Television News Directors Association, or the Online Journalists Association then they will never be reporting opinions in the first place.
However, there is a journalistic benefit to curation beyond the opinion column. The New York Times and others are hosting or hyperlinking to other sources from their sites. This act confers the reputation of the New York Times onto those other stories and therefore increases their visibility and market value. This is a way in which the mainstream media is opening its doors to the developing business of Internet news. On the flip side, some bloggers are using curation, analysis, and elaboration to make themselves into journalists. (Rosenbaum, 2009)
Examples of bloggers who do not fit the requirements to be a journalist are numerous, but a growing number may deserve the title. Matt Drudge of the Drudge Report is one who has crossed the threshold. The Huffington Post is another site that has made the transition. Both have gone beyond simply aggregating the news to become sources for breaking stories in addition to their renowned commentary. (Rosenbaum, 2009)
Even as more bloggers are becoming journalists, an equal number of journalists are starting to blog. The irony, however, is that those journalists who blog don’t seem to be losing their reputations as journalists. It seems that the unwritten law of the business is that while only some bloggers can be journalists, all journalists can be bloggers. The rule is similar with news curators and opinion media. I propose that this has to do with the primary pursuit of the individual and the organization. A company that produces journalism, and consequently employs journalists, acquires a reputation for their work. In that case journalism is their primary pursuit, while bloging or writing opinion columns might be secondary and less important. It is more difficult to make the case that other categories of media creators are journalists when they only occasionally break stories, research facts, or inform the public. The key: journalists have to serve their purpose of informing the public and operating on their behalf as a primary pursuit.
Another news trend is what CNN calls “I-Reporters.” This is an interactive online experience that allows users to submit pictures, videos, or other first hand accounts of news events they’ve observed. The website aggregates all the stories while CNN personell can choose to curate feature these reports in their coverage, or in their weekly show “iReport for CNN.” (CNN, 2009) The question to be asked about this is whether CNN is creating armies of journalists, or simply acting as an aggregator/curator for amateur content.
I believe that CNN’s primary task was curation, even before they incorporated “iReporters.” The network gets most of its content from partnerships with stations around the country, and they aggregate all the stories or video into their website or television outlets. They have only a relatively small number of professionals whose job it is to seek out and produce original stories. “iReporting” simply supplements the network of content providers that already exists. Most of the local stations that provide CNN with content do employ journalists based on my definition. “iReporters” fail to meet this definition because it is not their primary pursuit. While their content may be published for the public via CNN and while they may aspire to be a journalist, these people remain amateurs. While their content should be respected as first-hand accounts, they should not be afforded the respect and privilege of journalists.
Opponents to my positions may argue that I’m creating an elite class of content producers that are called journalists. They are overstating my position. Journalists are free to come and go under my definition. There is no licensing, no elite knighthood given to the people who properly call themselves journalists. All I’m asking for is strict adherence to the definition of “journalist” in order to maintain the respect afforded to content created by people in that position. The reputation should be protected because stories created from that position adhere to a higher level of ethical professionalism. They are stories from people who have made it their mission to find and share truth. Journalists’ stories should be given more respect than those from iReporters, aggregators, curators, or commentators.
References:
Carter, T. B., Franklin, M. A., & Wright, J. B. (2008). The First Amendment and the Fourth Estate, The Law of Mass Media. Mineola, New York: Foundation Press.
DrudgeReportArchives.com © 2009. (n.d.). Retrieved April 28, 2009, from http://www.drudgereportarchives.com/data/2002/01/17/20020117_175502_ml.htm
Feaver, D. (n.d.). Doug Feaver – Listening to the Dot-Comments – washingtonpost.com. Retrieved April 28, 2009, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/08/AR2009040803248.html
John McCain | The Daily Show | Comedy Central. (n.d.). Retrieved April 28, 2009, from http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=115528&title=john-mccain
KAKUTANI, M. (n.d.). Television – Is Jon Stewart the Most Trusted Man in America? – NYTimes.com. Retrieved April 28, 2009, from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/17/arts/television/17kaku.html
RTNDA – Ethics – Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct . (n.d.). Retrieved April 28, 2009, from http://www.rtnda.org/pages/media_items/code-of-ethics-and-professional-conduct48.php
Rosenbaum, S. (n.d.). Can ‘Curation’ Save Media?. Retrieved April 28, 2009, from http://www.businessinsider.com/can-curation-save-media-2009-4
State of the Blogosphere. (n.d.). Retrieved April 28, 2009, from technorati.com/blogging/state-of-the-blogosphere/
e., bye., & Pontiac. (n.d.). iReport – Your News Stories Selected and Voted on for CNN.com. Retrieved April 28, 2009, from http://www.cnn.com/ireport/
laws. (n.d.). Society of Professional Journalists: Code of Ethics. Retrieved April 28, 2009, from http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp
