contentious.com

(NOTE: This is part 2 of a series. You might want to start reading from the beginning.)

At sessions like the SPJ seminar I attended last Saturday, there’s a lot of hand-wringing over whether bloggers are (or can be) “real” journalists. Many reporters and editors who work for mainstream news organizations seem especially uncomfortable with the notion that bloggers might be infiltrating their club.

The funny thing is that while journalists appear anxious to bar the doors, bloggers generally don’t care whether they’re admitted to the journalism club. That’s right: There is no significant movement among bloggers to be generally recognized as journalists.

So why all the fuss?…

The featured speaker at the SPJ seminar was noted blogger, author, and weblog pundit Rebecca Blood, who has published her own set of ethical standards for blogging. Here are some relevant excerpts from her talk:

“The main problem that I came up against in devising my set of ethics is that many bloggers – in fact, I would say most bloggers – don’t consider themselves to be journalists. The problem would be easy, if they did. You could just point them to one of the established set of journalism ethics, and tell them to have at it.”

“…In my view, any blogger who wants to be considered a journalist is going to have to adhere to [traditional journalistic] standards, not mine – mine are not sufficient to ensure journalistic integrity. On the other hand, I wish professional publishers (professional news organizations included) would adhere to the standards I’ve laid out. Because I think they really are best practices grounded in the very nature of the web.”

“…When I first started thinking and writing about this subject, I searched for a canonical definition. I couldn’t find one. Journalism, it seems, is like pornography. The specific definition varies from person to person, but in general, you know it when you see it.”

“…You can do journalism on a weblog. I just don’t think most of us are, or most of us want to. I certainly don’t consider myself to be a journalist.”

For the record: I agree with most, but not all, of Blood’s standards. However, I agree with her observation that the vast majority of bloggers are not trying to commit journalism in their weblogs.

Later in the seminar, Chris Cobler (editor of the Greeley Tribune newspaper and author of the Virtual Greality editor’s weblog) noted:

“I think the term professional journalist only matters to us [journalists]. Our audience and the public at large generally don’t care about that distinction. We’re the only ones making a big deal about it.”

TAKE ME, FOR INSTANCE

I have a journalism degree. I worked for several years as a staff journalist and editor. I’m involved in journalism organizations. I still do freelance journalism, although that’s currently a small part of my career.

My weblog CONTENTIOUS often discusses journalistic matters. Yet I rarely use it to deliver journalism. Why? Because I prefer to present ideas, perspectives, and items for which the journalistic model would be too limiting. So I generally reserve my journalistic skills for other projects.

As I’ve mentioned before, I consider journalism to be a craft, a collection of skills that people practice. This does not depend on the mode of delivery.

If I chose, I would be ready and able use this weblog (or any other) as a vehicle for quality, original, independent journalism – and pity the fool who’d challenge that description. It’s just not what I wish to do with this weblog at this time. That could change at any time – but it’s up to ME to make that call. I really don’t care what anyone else (in or out of the journalism heirarchy) would have to say about it. I’m confident in my own skills, integrity, and intentions.

I also believe that any journalist who cares to CAN learn the skills to practice quality journalism. Further, I believe that any journalist who aspires to commit journalism SHOULD learn those skills.

Necessary reality check: People were doing good journalism for a long time before universities started handing out journalism degrees and agencies and organizations started bestowing official press credentials. Similarly, plenty of people with journalism degrees, press credentials, and a long roll of credits from mainstream news organizations routinely practice pretty crappy journalism.

So as far as I’m concerned, journalism isn’t a matter of credentials. It’s a matter of proving yourself, with every single journalistic story you publish. Your reputation is all you have to offer, and it’s constantly on the line.

Just because people challenge you doesn’t mean you’re not necessarily a good journalist, or a good blogger. Most journalists, good and bad, are constantly questioned and challenged. Journalism touches nerves and there is always (always!) another way to report any story. The old adage in this field is, “If you’re not pissing someone off, you’re not doing your job.”

As much as journalism aspires toward objectivity, the world we report on is almost entirely subjective. I think, therefore, the subjectiveness of blogging is a perfect complement to the artificial objectivity of journalism. They balance each other out, providing a fuller, richer view of the world.

Journalism is very demanding, picky work. I can understand why most people don’t wish to do it. However, I don’t think you need to adhere to journalistic standards if you’re publishing a weblog – with the exception of quoting people accurately, and citing and linking to sources wherever possible.

WHY DO BLOGS MAKE SO MANY JOURNALISTS SQUEAMISH?

I think there are a few possible explanations for why mainstream journalists are so eager to differentiate themselves from, and so quick to criticize, bloggers. These are just my guesses – I heartily welcome comments from journalists, bloggers, and others on this topic.

1. Lack of understanding. Most mainstream journalists and editors do not read weblogs. No, I don’t have statistics for this, that’s just my observation – but I do know a LOT of journalists, and almost none of them read weblogs. If they do read any blogs regularly, these are generally written by and for journalism pros, like Poynter’s E-Media Tidbits (to which I contribute). They may occasionally glance at some of the popular A-list bloggers like Instapundit or Dan Gillmor. Still, in my experience most journalists are woefully ignorant of the extent, diversity, and value of the blogosphere. They blithely swallow stereotypes like “Blogs are just personal diaries, anyone can say anything there, so you can’t trust what blogs say, they can’t really offer journalism.” To me, such ignorance is inexcusable from people who are paid to be curious.
2. Journalistic tunnel vision. Often I find that journalists expect traditional journalistic standards to apply to virtually any type of published writing that isn’t specifically fiction. In my view, that’s neither realistic nor constructive. It simply doesn’t accurately reflect the world we live in, the people who live here, and what people think, feel, and experience. Journalism is neither more nor less important than more subjective presentations. They are all valid parts of the media spectrum.
3. Assumed inherent superiority. Journalists often assume that journalism is the best (and sometimes the only valid) model for exploring and talking publicly about current events and pressing public concerns. As far as most journalists are concerned, bloggers should at least want to be more like journalists – and if they don’t, then they really have no business publishing. It’s kind of like believing women are welcome in the workplace, but expecting that female colleagues should aspire to be more like men, or at least not challenge or question male behavioral norms.
4. Fear of losing power. Maybe mainstream news professionals are alarmed by bloggers because they can no longer pretend that they alone define and own the news. Actually they never did, but for a long time they were able to ignore that because they were pretty much the only significant publishers of news accessible to the general public. Imagining that you define and own the news is very heady and powerful. I can understand not wanting to give up that illusion.
5. Lack of faith in the audience. I’ve often heard journalists voice concerns that members of the general public are too easily “misled” by blogs and other forms of subjective communications. The implication is that only traditional journalism can be trusted to tell people what’s happening, what’s important, and what to think about current events. Without that guidance, people would hear and believe all kinds of stupid things. While I believe that journalism plays a valuable role in helping people understand their world, I also think it’s terribly pompous to assume that people are generally stupid and need to be told what’s going on, and what to think. Blogs generally tend to give their audiences more credit than traditional news organizations, in my opinion. And audiences prefer to be trusted and respected.

JOURNALISTS DON’T MEAN TO BE BIGOTED

I really don’t want to imply that journalists are consciously being close-minded or bigoted about bloggers. Honestly, by and large journalists are generally very open-minded, tolerant, and willing to learn and grow. Their journalistic values and practices generally serve them well in these respects.

However, we all hit mental walls sometimes – individually and in groups. I’ve done it too, and I’m sure I’ll do it again.

Make no mistake: Traditional journalism is very, very hard. I deeply respect the people who do it full-time, especially on daily deadlines. Like teachers, good journalists work hard and long for their usually meager pay.

And yet, I don’t see how it might demean full-time journalists working for traditional news organizations (whether staff or freelance) to recognized that other people (including bloggers) also can provide quality journalism. Also, bloggers can make valuable contributions to the media spectrum even if they aren’t doing traditional journalism, and even if they have no journalistic aspirations.

Sorry, but to ignore those opportunities just strikes me as paranoid and counterproductive.

…Anyway, these are my own entirely subjective guesses as to why so many journalists get upset and indignant about whether bloggers might be journalists, while the reverse is rarely true. I don’t claim to be right here, but I have presented my views, based on my experiences and interactions with both bloggers and journalists, fairly and in the spirit of moving this particular conversation forward.

I’m eager to hear other people’s views on this. Please comment below.

NEXT: Transparency vs. Substantiation: Two Sides of the Credibility Coin