Preston points to “recent trends in publishing and digital tools” as the reasons for questioning the definition of the words journalist, reporter, and “newsman.”

1. Should we reconsider the very definition of any word based on “RECENT trends?” In Twitter’s case, can a single tool — not even three years old — change so as to redefine three words.

2. If we assume that we SHOULD re-examine words as tools emerge, when do we stop? Since tools are constantly evolving, are definitions now moving targets?

3. Does it matter? Michelle Golden, a non-journalist Twitter newbie recently listed “invaluable on emerging news” as one the benefits of using Twitter (http://cli.gs/qZajRL). As an example, she pointed to the Orange County Register’s recent use of the tool during the Southern California fires. Call it journalism. Call it news. Call it programming. The non-journalist Twitter newbie called it “invaluable” and said that it relieved her worries “in a way nothing else did.” And that is all that matters. Full disclosure: I work for the Register and helped create that Twitter page. Golden describes herself as the president of a marketing firm. To the best of my knowledge, her company does not work with the Register, and her blog post was completely unsolicited.