Dan Gillmor asks in a Salon piece, “Who’s a journalist?” Commenters are weighing in.
But Dan, please pardon me for this reaction.
This question is so 2007.
Howard Weaver raised it in his old blog, Etaoin Shrdlu, that year. I wrote a paper that year for a UNC class that addressed the question.
Why are we still dealing with it?
Perhaps the question still draws reaction because many journalists are finding that others are co-opting the name, or they’re unsure whether they can still use the label for themselves if they’re not getting paid by organizations anymore to do journalism.
Either way, the question resembles discussion of how many angels can fit on the head of a pin, and I’d love to see us move on to other questions.
How can individuals finance their journalism? Which old ethical rules should we keep?
How can experienced journalists spread the ethics, values and ideals that are worth keeping to the new creators who call themselves journalists?
Is a sports marketing company that solicits and broadcasts high school football scores through text and Twitter a journalism company? Not unless they build a system that adds verification of the information, making it bulletproof from spammers and bots who will no doubt find it.
Is a site that scrapes content from local newspapers and repurposes it without attribution on “hyperlocal” WordPress blogs journalism? No, but how do you teach small local advertisers and readers to tell the difference?
Those are the questions that matter now. People describing themselves as journalists will be best judged by what they produce. Librarians and others working with academic papers are polishing systems that assign rankings to people based on their published works. Others like Spot.Us and Publish2 are experimenting with new funding models.
How can we make new forms work? Let’s get to it.
Move beyond 2007.